Trust - goes both ways. If the bank expects to trust you to make payments (even when it is financially stupid to do so) then the flip side of that trust is to expect that the bank will be supportive and helpful with long term, trusthworthy customers when there are issues and problems in the other direction.
...at least with this part.
The typical agreement is that the bank will lend you $x and you will pay it back under the agreed upon terms. You are breaking that agreement by walking away from that loan. You said above the flip side is to expect the bank to be supportive and helpful. Unless that was part of the agreement, it's not really the flip side, is it?
In cases of the people defaulting, they are breaking the agreement. In cases where the bank isn't supportive or helpful...they still didn't break the agreement.
The contract is that you will pay them X etc. OR forfeit the property. That forfeit is every bit as much part of the contract as the other. Walking away isn't a breach of the agreement, it's simply selecting the other option available to you in the contract.
The article makes this quite clear. So do all mortgage documents.
May God stand between you and harm in all the empty places you must walk.
Old Egyptian Blessing
Old Egyptian Blessing
Is walking away from a mortgage immoral?
- 12/10/2010 04:45:43 PM
1537 Views
Just as a contract is a two way street -
- 12/10/2010 05:12:09 PM
1022 Views
Sort of have to disagree...
- 13/10/2010 02:52:07 AM
983 Views
That's not true actually
- 14/10/2010 02:35:43 AM
914 Views
Of course it's immoral.
- 12/10/2010 05:13:16 PM
989 Views
But does one sided morality work?
- 12/10/2010 05:38:56 PM
1105 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
903 Views
A company or organization cannot act morally or immorally? I strongly disagree. *NM*
- 12/10/2010 07:50:42 PM
444 Views
No, it cannot. However the individuals making the decisions for the company can. *NM*
- 12/10/2010 08:48:23 PM
388 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
967 Views
I'm not absolved of my obligations based on the bad behaviors of others.
- 12/10/2010 08:25:33 PM
882 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
1082 Views
That's the only kind of morality there is! What the hell is wrong with you?
- 12/10/2010 08:15:55 PM
934 Views
nothing wrong with me but I think you are off your meds again
- 12/10/2010 09:34:33 PM
924 Views
Re: nothing wrong with me but I think you are off your meds again
- 15/10/2010 02:50:49 PM
1429 Views
well I really can't argue with the wrong is wrong end of story belief system
- 15/10/2010 05:40:22 PM
1121 Views
A contract isn't a promise; it's a legal agreement. *NM*
- 12/10/2010 06:25:24 PM
462 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
967 Views
I would agree with you if contracts didn't provide for breaking them.
- 12/10/2010 07:33:15 PM
813 Views
Hrm.
- 12/10/2010 07:35:38 PM
1037 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
459 Views
Let's assume we're talking about a marriage where no such oath was taken... *NM*
- 12/10/2010 08:10:54 PM
471 Views
if there is no oath of fidelity then straying would not be immoral *NM*
- 12/10/2010 08:40:53 PM
438 Views
It's not immoral to break the marriage contract.
- 12/10/2010 08:19:50 PM
1078 Views
That must be why they have you sign something called an agreementory note 
*NM*
- 12/10/2010 07:33:32 PM
482 Views
*NM*
- 12/10/2010 07:33:32 PM
482 Views
I don't think it's immoral at all. The contract usually specifies penalties for breach.
- 12/10/2010 05:28:34 PM
1066 Views
You didn't mention the third party
- 12/10/2010 08:26:56 PM
845 Views
in a way I did since I did mention society
- 12/10/2010 08:54:07 PM
992 Views
What if you look at it from the other perspective?
- 12/10/2010 09:00:20 PM
1014 Views
Sure, you could do that.
- 13/10/2010 01:54:55 AM
1005 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
905 Views
As a professional in financial services - no, it is not.
- 13/10/2010 01:44:18 AM
947 Views
but almost nobody sees it that way
- 13/10/2010 12:53:25 PM
952 Views
Is the deal that if you default, the bank gets the house and nothing else, though?
- 13/10/2010 02:40:48 PM
935 Views
I think it's morally wrong to walk away from credit card debt. *NM*
- 13/10/2010 09:43:11 PM
434 Views
I agree, what do you think is different?
- 13/10/2010 09:59:36 PM
962 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
434 Views
I too am unable to work out what distinguishes the two situations.
- 13/10/2010 11:54:15 PM
900 Views
I lost sleep over it, but I did it anyway.
- 13/10/2010 05:24:19 AM
1046 Views
Obviously, the essential difference is can't pay versus won't pay.
- 13/10/2010 02:16:07 PM
937 Views
are you socializing your debt when it is a private bank?
- 13/10/2010 03:14:48 PM
993 Views
You are when said bank requires a bailout. And very many of them do.
- 13/10/2010 03:22:59 PM
933 Views
I really don't understand a system where this could be an advantage.
- 13/10/2010 11:16:57 PM
944 Views
There's generally something like a 7 or 10 year limit on credit reporting here.
- 13/10/2010 11:46:58 PM
965 Views
What's the use of suing someone who has no money? *NM*
- 13/10/2010 11:48:47 PM
495 Views
You can garnish their wages.
- 13/10/2010 11:49:36 PM
944 Views
With parsley?
- 13/10/2010 11:51:37 PM
1021 Views
No, "someone" most certainly did not, wicked young Miss! Hmph! *NM*
- 13/10/2010 11:52:40 PM
482 Views
If they suddenly come into some, you're entitled to it. *NM*
- 14/10/2010 12:07:34 AM
561 Views
Bit of a long shot. *NM*
- 14/10/2010 12:09:12 AM
430 Views
Very. Best to cover your bases though. *NM*
- 14/10/2010 10:04:25 PM
450 Views
Not if the doctrine of election applies.
- 14/10/2010 10:14:07 PM
918 Views
Are we not talking about credit companies going after people who owe them money?
- 14/10/2010 10:18:47 PM
967 Views
I am currently in that situation...
- 14/10/2010 05:03:23 AM
1072 Views
In Washington you can contest the assessed value used to determine property taxes.
- 14/10/2010 07:27:02 AM
987 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
435 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
981 Views