I don't think it's immoral at all. The contract usually specifies penalties for breach.
Tom Send a noteboard - 12/10/2010 05:28:34 PM
The mortgage contract, as well as the promissory note for the mortgage, usually specify penalties for a breach. If you choose to breach the contract, you need to be ready to pay those penalties.
All the Fannie/Freddie-backed mortgages in the country say that the bank retains the right to come after you personally to the extent the collateral (your house) is insufficient to satisfy the loan. A lot of people, particularly in Florida, have found this out the hard way - they walked away from houses that were underwater, moved to other states and now have court judgments against them for the remainder.
Business contracts rarely have anything to do with morality - peoples' actions can, and their interaction with others can, but the actual transaction is just a transaction.
All the Fannie/Freddie-backed mortgages in the country say that the bank retains the right to come after you personally to the extent the collateral (your house) is insufficient to satisfy the loan. A lot of people, particularly in Florida, have found this out the hard way - they walked away from houses that were underwater, moved to other states and now have court judgments against them for the remainder.
Business contracts rarely have anything to do with morality - peoples' actions can, and their interaction with others can, but the actual transaction is just a transaction.
Political correctness is the pettiest form of casuistry.
ἡ δὲ κἀκ τριῶν τρυπημάτων ἐργαζομένη ἐνεκάλει τῇ φύσει, δυσφορουμένη, ὅτι δὴ μὴ καὶ τοὺς τιτθοὺς αὐτῇ εὐρύτερον ἢ νῦν εἰσι τρυπώη, ὅπως καὶ ἄλλην ἐνταῦθα μίξιν ἐπιτεχνᾶσθαι δυνατὴ εἴη. – Procopius
Ummaka qinnassa nīk!
*MySmiley*
ἡ δὲ κἀκ τριῶν τρυπημάτων ἐργαζομένη ἐνεκάλει τῇ φύσει, δυσφορουμένη, ὅτι δὴ μὴ καὶ τοὺς τιτθοὺς αὐτῇ εὐρύτερον ἢ νῦν εἰσι τρυπώη, ὅπως καὶ ἄλλην ἐνταῦθα μίξιν ἐπιτεχνᾶσθαι δυνατὴ εἴη. – Procopius
Ummaka qinnassa nīk!
*MySmiley*
Is walking away from a mortgage immoral?
- 12/10/2010 04:45:43 PM
1591 Views
Just as a contract is a two way street -
- 12/10/2010 05:12:09 PM
1059 Views
Of course it's immoral.
- 12/10/2010 05:13:16 PM
1026 Views
But does one sided morality work?
- 12/10/2010 05:38:56 PM
1141 Views
You asked about the morality of walking away when the borrower still has the ability to pay.
- 12/10/2010 07:31:10 PM
938 Views
A company or organization cannot act morally or immorally? I strongly disagree. *NM*
- 12/10/2010 07:50:42 PM
462 Views
No, it cannot. However the individuals making the decisions for the company can. *NM*
- 12/10/2010 08:48:23 PM
403 Views
If banks can not behave in moral manner why should people be expected to behave in moral manner?
- 12/10/2010 08:07:56 PM
1006 Views
I'm not absolved of my obligations based on the bad behaviors of others.
- 12/10/2010 08:25:33 PM
924 Views
Because it's their moral obligation. Morality is not a trade, you act morally because it is right
- 12/10/2010 08:47:41 PM
1119 Views
That's the only kind of morality there is! What the hell is wrong with you?
- 12/10/2010 08:15:55 PM
980 Views
nothing wrong with me but I think you are off your meds again
- 12/10/2010 09:34:33 PM
958 Views
Re: nothing wrong with me but I think you are off your meds again
- 15/10/2010 02:50:49 PM
1472 Views
well I really can't argue with the wrong is wrong end of story belief system
- 15/10/2010 05:40:22 PM
1158 Views
A contract isn't a promise; it's a legal agreement. *NM*
- 12/10/2010 06:25:24 PM
476 Views
Which is why contracts have to be pages and pages long and combed over by bloodsucking lawyers.
- 12/10/2010 06:39:18 PM
1000 Views
I would agree with you if contracts didn't provide for breaking them.
- 12/10/2010 07:33:15 PM
849 Views
Hrm.
- 12/10/2010 07:35:38 PM
1070 Views
did you take a personal oath in front of god and your loved ones to pay the loan back? *NM*
- 12/10/2010 08:09:07 PM
475 Views
Let's assume we're talking about a marriage where no such oath was taken... *NM*
- 12/10/2010 08:10:54 PM
488 Views
if there is no oath of fidelity then straying would not be immoral *NM*
- 12/10/2010 08:40:53 PM
451 Views
It's not immoral to break the marriage contract.
- 12/10/2010 08:19:50 PM
1119 Views
That must be why they have you sign something called an agreementory note 
*NM*
- 12/10/2010 07:33:32 PM
493 Views
*NM*
- 12/10/2010 07:33:32 PM
493 Views
I don't think it's immoral at all. The contract usually specifies penalties for breach.
- 12/10/2010 05:28:34 PM
1106 Views
You didn't mention the third party
- 12/10/2010 08:26:56 PM
887 Views
in a way I did since I did mention society
- 12/10/2010 08:54:07 PM
1030 Views
What if you look at it from the other perspective?
- 12/10/2010 09:00:20 PM
1057 Views
Sure, you could do that.
- 13/10/2010 01:54:55 AM
1047 Views
The problem is that you're buying something today and paying for it for the next 15/30/50 years.
- 13/10/2010 03:04:26 PM
946 Views
As a professional in financial services - no, it is not.
- 13/10/2010 01:44:18 AM
986 Views
but almost nobody sees it that way
- 13/10/2010 12:53:25 PM
989 Views
Is the deal that if you default, the bank gets the house and nothing else, though?
- 13/10/2010 02:40:48 PM
977 Views
I think it's morally wrong to walk away from credit card debt. *NM*
- 13/10/2010 09:43:11 PM
451 Views
I agree, what do you think is different?
- 13/10/2010 09:59:36 PM
998 Views
The difference is that the bank owns the house. Whereas when I buy stuff, it's mine. *NM*
- 19/10/2010 07:05:34 PM
450 Views
I too am unable to work out what distinguishes the two situations.
- 13/10/2010 11:54:15 PM
942 Views
I lost sleep over it, but I did it anyway.
- 13/10/2010 05:24:19 AM
1081 Views
Obviously, the essential difference is can't pay versus won't pay.
- 13/10/2010 02:16:07 PM
965 Views
are you socializing your debt when it is a private bank?
- 13/10/2010 03:14:48 PM
1031 Views
You are when said bank requires a bailout. And very many of them do.
- 13/10/2010 03:22:59 PM
965 Views
I really don't understand a system where this could be an advantage.
- 13/10/2010 11:16:57 PM
980 Views
There's generally something like a 7 or 10 year limit on credit reporting here.
- 13/10/2010 11:46:58 PM
1007 Views
What's the use of suing someone who has no money? *NM*
- 13/10/2010 11:48:47 PM
514 Views
You can garnish their wages.
- 13/10/2010 11:49:36 PM
988 Views
With parsley?
- 13/10/2010 11:51:37 PM
1057 Views
No, "someone" most certainly did not, wicked young Miss! Hmph! *NM*
- 13/10/2010 11:52:40 PM
498 Views
If they suddenly come into some, you're entitled to it. *NM*
- 14/10/2010 12:07:34 AM
574 Views
Bit of a long shot. *NM*
- 14/10/2010 12:09:12 AM
447 Views
Very. Best to cover your bases though. *NM*
- 14/10/2010 10:04:25 PM
465 Views
Not if the doctrine of election applies.
- 14/10/2010 10:14:07 PM
963 Views
Are we not talking about credit companies going after people who owe them money?
- 14/10/2010 10:18:47 PM
1008 Views
I am currently in that situation...
- 14/10/2010 05:03:23 AM
1107 Views
In Washington you can contest the assessed value used to determine property taxes.
- 14/10/2010 07:27:02 AM
1028 Views
it is easy for me and others to be glib when it is just a theory *NM*
- 14/10/2010 08:19:16 PM
453 Views
If you have the ability to pay, I would consider it yet another immoral act in an immoral industry.
- 14/10/2010 07:49:38 AM
1018 Views