The looming housing crisis acutally seems fairly simple to forestall or fix. It seems to me that anything is better than a default, right? When the mortgage holder defaults, the lender gets nothing. Therefore, if there were to be a massive conversion of all these two year ARMs to reasonable fixed rate mortgages, the potential crisis could be wholly averted.
But this isn't happening. This leads me to believe that the banks actually prefer foreclosure and firesale which typically results in another mortgage. I think the problem may be that the mortgages are no longer held by the banks. They have been collateralized and sold as investment vehicles. So they bank is not left holding the worthless mortgage, rather, the CDO investor is left holding the worthless mortgage. Therefore, the bank doesn't really give a sht. But in this scenario, shouldn't the defaulted house actually belong to the investor rather than the bank? Can anyone comment intelligently on this?
2007-11-24
00:42:55
·
7 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Renting & Real Estate