HN2new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> But that seems dishonest.

It's not. The bank has calculated and accepted the risk and factored it into your interest rate and other charges. Considering it to be dishonest is financially equivalent to considering a (not fraudulent) insurance payout to be dishonest.

Think about it this way. The bank has effectively bought an insurance policy to protect itself against this event and is paying the premium out of your interest charges. Now does it seem dishonest?



In the US if you put down less than 20% the bank literally takes out an insurance policy called Primary Mortgage Insurnace for this risk and makes you pay for it.


"It's not. The bank has calculated and accepted the risk and factored it into your interest rate and other charges. Considering it to be dishonest is financially equivalent to considering a (not fraudulent) insurance payout to be dishonest."

That's not a true equivalency. Unless your loan has language or provisions for "mailing back the keys", doing so is an act of default and regardless of how well (or poorly) the lender(s) has/have hedged against the default you are breaking the agreement.

A real equivalency is stealing from walmart "because they can afford it". You shouldn't do that and you also shouldn't default on agreements you enter into.


> A real equivalency is stealing from walmart "because they can afford it"

That's not a real equivalent at all. Walmart could press charges and recoup their loss through legal action. Stealing from Walmart is illegal.

Defaulting on a contract is not illegal. That's precisely why we have contracts in the first place. It spells out what would happen in a default, and both parties voluntarily enter into the agreement. If one party is not happy with the terms of default then they shouldn't sign the contract.

In a no recourse default, it is literally spelled out in the contract: "If you default, the lender will not be come after your other assets".


> That's not a true equivalency. Unless your loan has language or provisions for "mailing back the keys", doing so is an act of default and regardless of how well (or poorly) the lender(s) has/have hedged against the default you are breaking the agreement.

It depends on what you mean by "breaking the agreement." The state of default, its triggers, and its consequences are part of the agreement. You are acting within the scope of the agreement by triggering that state.

If you write a program like this:

    if (foo) { doX(); } else { doY(); }
does foo being false "break" the if statement? In a mortgage, it is (vastly simplified):

    if (youKeepPaying) {
      youGetToLiveInTheHouse();
    } else if (youSendUsTheKeys) {
      exit();
    } else {
      weWillSendTheSheriff();
    }
If anything, the last condition is the exceptional one. The contract doesn't generally contemplate what happens if you stop paying but also refuse to leave the dwelling.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: