60 Minutes Looks at Walking Away

by Kirk Kinder on May 10, 2010

Interesting story from 60 Minutes last night about walking away from an underwater mortgage. As I have stated several times, I think you should walk away from a mortgage if you can rent an equivalent place for considerably less than your current mortgage. This is a contract between two parties. Each party should understand the risk they are undertaking when the contract is signed. The banks failed in this regard miserably. They gave mortgages to folks who should have never received a mortgage. Further, the banks required no skin in the game as far as a downpayment, and the banks put pressure on home appraisers to meet the rising prices in the market. The banks did this because they were making tons on writing these mortgages as the investment banks securitized these mortgages.

Now that their gravy train has run its course, they are pulling the old moral argument out to guilt borrowers from following the proper business move. Of course, the banks aren’t afraid to walk away as Morgan Stanley walked from a $5 Billion commercial development in San Fran, and the mortgage bankers association just short saled their headquarters in DC.

When making a decision to stay or walk away, one needs to examine several factors such as how long they plan to live there, is this their dream house, are kids in a good school, etc. However, the cost of ownership relative to renting must be one of them. Think logically, not emotionally. Also, see a real estate lawyer before making any final decision on walking away.


Watch CBS News Videos Online

  • Carl,

    I also am pretty negative on eating lots of fast food, but some people tell me they have very satisfying meals at a fast food joints.

    Glad the annuity worked out for you. Despite your experience, I still believe that annuities are sold, not bought. I have found more folks who have been ill-served by annuities, especially older folks who find out after the fact the annuity is not as liquid as they need. Also, the fees on annuities, for the most part, are egregious. The $400K you put in the annuity probably earned your advisor between $25,000 to $40,000. He would receive that whether the product served your needs or not.

    Occasionally, I will look at using annuities if a client is stuck in one or are in a litigious practice such as medicine, but even then I use a Vanguard or Ameritas product as it strips out the commissions and puts more money in the client's pocket.

    All my best,

    Also, you assumption that your money would have been flat with me is presumptuous. I entered the business in 2002. Since that date, I have had one down year, 2008, and that was an average of only 10%.
  • carl Jaegger
    You seem to go around bashing annuities. I put $400,000 into an annuity 10 years ago at the advice of my advisor. The market has been flat, but with the 7% step-up each year I have doubled my income base to $800,000. Now, my wife and I get $48,000/year for life. If I used your advise I would be drawing $48,000 from 400,000 and would run out of money by my early 70s. You are very negative on a product that has brought my wife and I great piece of mind.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Previous post: Do As I Say, Not As I Do

Next post: The Senate Shows Whom They Serve