 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsCat AnecdotesHealth and BehaviorRescue CatKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Cat Forum / Cat Anecdotes / May 2008Remember my Wells Fargo problems. . .
I was told the other day that the FBI is investigating "Country Wide" mortgage company along with Wells Fargo Mortgage company. And guess why they're being checked out. Yup, they were claiming that people weren't making their payments when they were, and were trying to foreclose on people without working with them on the payments. We live in a prime area for real estate, and Wells Fargo could probably sell the house for about $10-20,000 more than we bought it for. Need I say more? Anyway, they really hate me because not only am I refusing to make phone payments, but I'm sending in cashier's checks and having the payments as certified, receipt requested. So they changed my due date for payments from the fifth of the month to the first. Buggers. Pam S, > I was told the other day that the FBI is investigating "Country Wide" > mortgage company along with Wells Fargo Mortgage company. And guess why [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Pam S, I keep seeing bad things about CountryWide in financial news, for months now. It seems to me some of their company bigwigs absconded with whole bunches of other people's dough and are on the lam, possibly in other countries. Stay vigilant. >> I was told the other day that the FBI is investigating "Country Wide" >> mortgage company along with Wells Fargo Mortgage company. And guess [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > countries. > Stay vigilant. Dang, I think we use CountryWide. I was hoping that what Pam heard and is experiencing was just a fluke. I guess we'll wait and see. kili > I was told the other day that the FBI is investigating "Country Wide" > mortgage company along with Wells Fargo Mortgage company. And guess why [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Pam S, Grrr. Don't get me started on mortage/finance companies. It's legal robbery. I sent a check to "Citizens Finance" where the (wrecked) truck was financed, for the payoff + some overage that we depended on getting back in order to buy the tag for the new truck. (It was from the insurance co.).....I got a nasty "Dear Deadbeat, your payment is late" letter two weeks later. Called them, and they said they had to "HOLD" the insurance check for one month "To be sure it clears the bank." What???? In what universe does it take 30 days to clear a check? BUT GET THIS. Every single day, the balance accrues interest. Plus they charged us an $18.50 late fee. ALL THE TIME, they have the payoff in their hot little hands. It's robbery, I tell ya. (Reminds me of something a comedian once said about late fees, "They charge you more of what you don't have in first place." I also sent the check certified, so I know *exactly* when they got it. It's a shame that Wells FArgo are such crooks you have to do that every month. It's costly. Sherry I paid a lawyer $50.00 to write a place that pulled this on me. I had the returned certified card signed an, the date the check actually cleared. They gave me my money with out much argument after that. Even had to return my "late fee". On May 3, 7:19 pm, "tanadashoes" <tan...@earthlink.net> wrote: > I was told the other day that the FBI is investigating "Country Wide" > mortgage company along with Wells Fargo Mortgage company. And guess why [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Pam S, Grrr. Don't get me started on mortage/finance companies. It's legal robbery. I sent a check to "Citizens Finance" where the (wrecked) truck was financed, for the payoff + some overage that we depended on getting back in order to buy the tag for the new truck. (It was from the insurance co.).....I got a nasty "Dear Deadbeat, your payment is late" letter two weeks later. Called them, and they said they had to "HOLD" the insurance check for one month "To be sure it clears the bank." What???? In what universe does it take 30 days to clear a check? BUT GET THIS. Every single day, the balance accrues interest. Plus they charged us an $18.50 late fee. ALL THE TIME, they have the payoff in their hot little hands. It's robbery, I tell ya. (Reminds me of something a comedian once said about late fees, "They charge you more of what you don't have in first place." I also sent the check certified, so I know *exactly* when they got it. It's a shame that Wells FArgo are such crooks you have to do that every month. It's costly. Sherry > BUT GET THIS. Every single day, the balance accrues interest. Plus > they charged us an $18.50 late fee. Try this one- many years ago when we had the poll tax over here we got a little extra cash from somewhere and decided to be responsible for a change (not something we make a habit of!) and pay the whole year at once A few months later Dave was mystified to be summoned to court for non- payment so he popped along (our local magistrates court is a couple of doors down from the flat if any of you have seen shots of Pete Docherty leaving court in East London that's the one) and on checking it turned out the summons should have been sent to another person with a similar name.So Dave was satisfied....until he got a letter, which basically said, debt collectors wanted a 64.00 administration fee and for every day he didn't pay they would add 30.00 to the bill and if he didn't pay they would send baliffs round which would cost 150 per baliff (minimum of 3 maybe more) plus if they took stuff away that would be 500.,00 for the van and 35.00 a day storage charge on top of the 30,00 per day for not paying it so he had better sent the 64.00 fee now as interest was mounting up from the day they posted the letter- second class so there was alreadt 90.00 on top and he would need to add another 60.00 since it would take two days for them to get the cheque and an extra 150.00 because the cheque would need time to clear unless he called them there and then and used his credit card, in which case they would happily settle for 154.00 Remember this is the ;late 80's when 154.00 was pretty reasonably weekly wage He called them and said rude words and they chased him for a month or so including once sending baliff's to the door complete with van because when he called them and said it wasn't him they should be chasing their reply was "You would say that wouldn't you?" Turned out the council forgot to tell therm he was the wrong person....He had to go back to the court and get a letter for them by which time the fee had snowballed into a few thousand pounds Lesley Slave of the Fabulous Furballs I may be paying a lawyer soon, myself. Seems it's legal for anyone to claim you owe them money and report you to the credit bureaus these days. A week or two ago, I got a message about a "claim" for someone with my maiden name on the home machine. I was good enough (read: stupid) to call them back and try to tell the b$s*a#d that I spoke to that he had the wrong person/phone. When he snapped "Well, who is this" , I had had just about enough and snapped back "Who the hell wants to know" and he hung up on me. So yesterday, a new "collections acount" shows up on my credit report. And of course no one is answering phones today, so I just have to stew until tomorrow. Rant over..... --Kim > I paid a lawyer $50.00 to write a place that pulled this on me. I had the > returned certified card signed an, the date the check actually cleared. [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > every month. It's costly. > Sherry Definitely get on life lock >I may be paying a lawyer soon, myself. Seems it's legal for anyone to >claim you owe them money and report you to the credit bureaus these days. [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] >> every month. It's costly. >> Sherry >> I was told the other day that the FBI is investigating "Country Wide" >> mortgage company along with Wells Fargo Mortgage company. And guess why [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > every month. It's costly. > Sherry There was a time when a payment was LATE only when it was received after the next statement had been mailed. (In other words, if payment is received before your next billing date, it's on time, no matter what date the company selects as "past due".) So far as I'm concerned, if the payment is reflected on my next statement, it CANNOT be considered "late", and I refuse to pay "late charges" if that happens. (Fortunately, I usually pay my balance in full each month, so they haven't much basis for argument.) Apparently the practice of allowing less than a month between billing date and "due" date (after which "late charges" apply) is coming under scrutiny by the courts. (Maybe the mortgage scandals may have an up-side, too?) > I was told the other day that the FBI is investigating "Country Wide" > mortgage company along with Wells Fargo Mortgage company. And guess why [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Pam S, Eeeeeeeeeeeep. Wells Fargo holds our mortgage. Not who originally issued it, but who bought it from the original lender..... as if we had any say in the matter. Not had any trouble with them (yet, knock wood), but that may because we make our payments electronically, usually 2-7 days BEFORE the due date (1st of the month), as DH gets his pay the LAST FRIDAY of the month, so as soon as we see the direct deposit is in (usually is there before 8am on that payday, only once was it late, didn't show up until noon for whatever reason), we pay all bills that we have received , and the rest as we receive them. >^..^< This is Kitty. Copy and paste Kitty into your signature to help her wipe out Bunny's world domination. -- The ONE and ONLY lefthanded-pathetic-paranoid-psychotic-sarcastic-wiseass-ditzy former-blonde in Bloomington! (And proud of it, too)© email me at nalee1964 (at) comcast (dot) net http://community.webshots.com/user/mgcmdjeep >I was told the other day that the FBI is investigating "Country Wide" >mortgage company along with Wells Fargo Mortgage company. Last year, I had a series of really good job interviews with Country Wide. It was close to home. The salary offered was fantastic. Now I know why my guardian angel didn't let me get that job. Hugs and Purrs, Mark  SignatureProof of Sanity Forged Upon Request >I was told the other day that the FBI is investigating "Country Wide" >mortgage company along with Wells Fargo Mortgage company. And guess why [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Pam S, Who ever is in charge and responsible at Country Wide, should be drawn and quartered. Barring that, I'd consider lethal injection. Life in prison is just too good for them. From what I've seen personally, they are almost solely responsible for the entire mortgage/forclosure debacle. On a par or worse than the Enron scandle. They spent the past five years pushing equity loans on people. And made a fortune doing it. Then walk away when everything comes crashing down. I've always been a big believer in personal responsibility and paying ones debts. But their should still be a special hell for those that make loans when they know perfectly well the borrower will be unable to keep up with the payments. Particular where homes and businesses are concerned. Jo >> I was told the other day that the FBI is investigating "Country Wide" >> mortgage company along with Wells Fargo Mortgage company. And guess why [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > Jo Amen to that, Jo. We looked at Countrywide when we were shopping for loans for our house/property. Talk about a bunch of slezoids! We knew exactly what we wanted, namely fixed 30 yr with no escrow or PMI, and they said no problem. But when we got the quote papers, it was for an adjustable with escrow and PMI. But they tried to hide the details in the paperwork, hoping no doubt that we wouldn't read carefully. But we're both engineers, so we read carefully and sent it back with a re-request for what we had originally requested. They tried again to screw us and at that point, we said no way. They are really a piece of work, there. --Kim > Amen to that, Jo. We looked at Countrywide when we were shopping for > loans for our house/property. Talk about a bunch of slezoids! We knew [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > --Kim When we signed the original documents for our house, both Rob and I read them over carefully, even though we both felt the hot breath of all the attorneys, clerks, and real estate agents flowing down the backs of our necks. The attorney for the sellers informed us that we were the first people he'd seen read their mortgage contract in a long long time. We didn't catch any errors, but then we were prepared to throw a hissy fit if they'd changed the conditions of the mortgage. Fortunately, everyone was amazingly honest and hadn't done so. We're at 30 year fixed with (now) 5.5% interest. I'm ok with that. Pam S . The attorney for the sellers informed us that we were the first > people he'd seen read their mortgage contract in a long long time. I am amazed!!!! Okay I rent but if I was taking out the biggest loan of my entire life would I read the small print?... Of course I would! Lesley Slave of the Fabulous Furballs On May 5, 7:32 am, "tanadashoes" <tan...@earthlink.net> wrote: . The attorney for the sellers informed us that we were the first > people he'd seen read their mortgage contract in a long long time. I am amazed!!!! Okay I rent but if I was taking out the biggest loan of my entire life would I read the small print?... Of course I would! ======================================== We had a fairly easy time of it finding a house that met our criteria. It also sailed through the inspection process, the VA loan process, the bidding war (we only bid $2000 below asking price) and so forth. It was less than a month from start to finish. I've bumped into people who claim to have spent months on end finding a place that suited them, going through the finance blues (we had excellent credit going in, circumstances since have changed it), bidding wars from hell, and so forth. I can understand being shell shocked after that and not reading the contract through. However, I was taught by parents who'd been stomped on enough, being stomped on enough, and marrying into a financially conservative family that refused to get stomped on. I read all contracts, service statements, and so forth. Clerks hate me, lawyers shun me, and I'm considered a prime candidate for death by ink poisoning. Actually I'm a marshmallow who panics when things aren't written on paper as they are represented by mouth. Don't ask me about the infamous transmission problem. Ok, do, but it still gripes my cookies. Pam S. tongue in cheek. DH made me get a car loan once so I would know how to do it, bought a brand new car, all in my name, first they had difficulty when it came to title time because of course a blind person couldn't own a car, DH says she's paying for it, its hers if you want the sale please don't be stupid. then to the paperwork, I knew what we could afford, and we choose no ac or automatic transmission, then, when he reads me the paperwork, they had put in an extended warranty and disability insurance, told the guy, DH is all the warranty I need, and if I got any more disabled I would be dead so I wouldn't really be bothered if they took it back... the finance dude started wining some crap about how the paperwork was done, DH stands up and says, ok we won't take any more of your time we will buy elsewhere... owner comes in ask what the issue was I told him that I didn't ask for the warrantee and disability and he is a bigot because he tried to not let me title my truck in my name, and I didn't want to buy it because of his wining... he looks at the guy and says retype that, and YOU do it leave the secretary alone... and take fife hundred more off, I was well pleased, Lee > On May 5, 7:32 am, "tanadashoes" <tan...@earthlink.net> wrote: > . The attorney for the sellers informed us that we were the first [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Pam S. tongue in cheek. > . The attorney for the sellers informed us that we were the first >> people he'd seen read their mortgage contract in a long long time. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Of course I would! The problem is, a lot of people don't understand what they're reading, and hate to admit their ignorance. Consequently, rather than spend the money to hire an attorney to look it over and advise them, they let themselves be suckered into a loan they can't afford. (And find themselves losing their entire investment later, because they were too cheap to pay attorney fees when it was in their best interest to do so.) >> Okay I rent but if I was taking out the biggest loan of my entire life >> would I read the small print?... >> >> Of course I would! > The problem is, a lot of people don't understand what they're reading, > and hate to admit their ignorance. Consequently, rather than spend the > money to hire an attorney to look it over and advise them, they let > themselves be suckered into a loan they can't afford. And don't forget, legal "small print" is often written in such a way as to be deliberately obfuscating. It's not only the confusing language, there's also reams of it. Does anyone want to go through pages and pages of text they can barely understand? For me it's not about not wanting to admit my ignorance. I just find it overwhelming! Agreed about hiring an attorney to help with that, though. If you can't afford to hire an attorney, that's a red flag. It probably means you can't afford the house, either. SignatureJoyce To email me, remove the triple-X from my user name. ^..^ >> I was told the other day that the FBI is investigating "Country Wide" >> mortgage company along with Wells Fargo Mortgage company. And guess why [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > Jo AMEN!!!!! Along with all the lenders (and credit cards) that quote very low "APR" percentage rates, without being sure that the borrower understands that "APR" stands for "adjustable percentage rate", which means that the rate can increase to whatever percentage the lender chooses, whenever they so choose! (Some of them ARE tied in to the initial rate for a specific length of time first, but not all of them.) I think urging people to "take advantage" of the equity in their home loans is immoral, too! There was a time when people invested in a home with the idea that, by the time they retired, they'd own it free and clear, with only taxes and upkeep to worry about. Loans were structured to pay off in twenty-five or thirty years, with fixed monthly payments designed to fit the purchaser's budget. Bad enough that "easy credit" has produced a society that works on the principle that, if all the credit cards aren't "maxed out", any desired high ticket merchandise is still affordable. Being slow-pay on those debts may produce collection agencies coming out of the woodwork, and marshals brandishing garnishments for your wages, but at least you still retain a roof over your heads! > AMEN!!!!! Along with all the lenders (and credit cards) that quote very > low "APR" percentage rates, without being sure that the borrower > understands that "APR" stands for "adjustable percentage rate", which > means that the rate can increase to whatever percentage the lender > chooses, whenever they so choose! (Some of them ARE tied in to the > initial rate for a specific length of time first, but not all of them.) Actually, APR stands for "annual percentage rate". The rate that gets quoted up front is a shorter-term rate. That shorter-term rate, compounded over a year, yields the APR. > Who ever is in charge and responsible at Country Wide, should be drawn and > quartered. Barring that, I'd consider lethal injection. Life in prison is [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Jo Well, yeah, it's opportunistic, it's predatory lending. But, don't you think *some* accountability rests with the borrower? I'm not talking about people like Pam, or the many others whose world gets turned upside down from health issues, or job loss, etc. There are a whole lot of people out there having homes reposessed simply because they bought homes more expensive than what they could afford. I"ve always been very frugal. I watched an Oprah segment on people and their debt, and I was simply blown away not only by the *amount* of credit card/second mortage debt, but the things they spent their money on! I'm also surprised by the type of houses that are being built now. You don't see modest, three bedroom houses like we were building in the 70s-80s in new additions nowadays. They're all so huge! Sherry On May 3, 11:12 pm, "Jo Firey" <jofi...@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > Who ever is in charge and responsible at Country Wide, should be drawn > and [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Jo Well, yeah, it's opportunistic, it's predatory lending. But, don't you think *some* accountability rests with the borrower? I'm not talking about people like Pam, or the many others whose world gets turned upside down from health issues, or job loss, etc. There are a whole lot of people out there having homes reposessed simply because they bought homes more expensive than what they could afford. I"ve always been very frugal. I watched an Oprah segment on people and their debt, and I was simply blown away not only by the *amount* of credit card/second mortage debt, but the things they spent their money on! I'm also surprised by the type of houses that are being built now. You don't see modest, three bedroom houses like we were building in the 70s-80s in new additions nowadays. They're all so huge! Sherry \\ I still believe in personal responsibility. But what is going to happen when a relatively young and naive couple goes to buy a house. When you walk into a cat dealership the first thing they want to ask you is how much can you spend a month. Now they have already shifted you maximum car expense budget (and it was probably supposed to include insurance and maintenance in your mind. And rather then try to put you into a car that you can pay off in three years, they will tell you you can afford to drive a much nicer car for that kind of money. Waffle over difference between lease and purchase and three years down the road you owe a payback far higher than the value of the car. Not to mention you have done nothing to establish a credit ratting. Same thing with a house, only they don't ask what you can afford to spend. They find out what you earn and what you owe, tell you how to manipulate a credit check so you will quality for a loan that is much more than you really can afford. But how do you argue? There people who know more about money than you do say you can afford it. They aren't really good at explaining property tax and Mello Roos and Insurance or flood insurance. Its pretty easy to not only spend more than you can afford, but to pay a lot more than the property is worth because you are starting to believe your own hype that this is doable. Jo > I still believe in personal responsibility. But what is going to happen > when a relatively young and naive couple goes to buy a house. > When you walk into a cat dealership the first thing they want to ask you is > how much can you spend a month. This is why I stick to moggies. :) <duck and run> SignatureJoyce To email me, remove the triple-X from my user name. ^..^ > > When you walk into a cat dealership the first thing they want to ask you is > > how much can you spend a month. > > This is why I stick to moggies. :) > > <duck and run> I paid the same price for my moggie as my pedigree cat. ;) SignatureMarina, Miranda and Caliban. In loving memory of Frank and Nikki. >>> When you walk into a cat dealership the first thing they want to >>> ask you is how much can you spend a month. >> This is why I stick to moggies. :) <duck and run> > I paid the same price for my moggie as my pedigree cat. ;) Helps when you have a breeder in the family! SignatureJoyce To email me, remove the triple-X from my user name. ^..^ insider trading, Lee > > bastXXXette@sonic.net wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > To email me, remove the triple-X from my user name. ^..^ > > I still believe in personal responsibility. But what is going to happen > > when a relatively young and naive couple goes to buy a house. > > > When you walk into a cat dealership the first thing they want to ask you is > > how much can you spend a month. There seem to be an awful lot of TV car ads that only quote a monthly amount, rather than a total purchase price. (They can't ALL be advertising leased automobiles, can they?) ...Come to think of it, I see a lot of TV ads (period) that quote only a monthly amount rather than total price for high-ticket items! > On May 3, 11:12 pm, "Jo Firey" <jofi...@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 65 lines] > > Jo- Hide quoted text - Very good points. I remember, when we were still just kids, getting turned down by the banker for a new car loan. Looking back, he did us a *huge* favor. What got me about the debt segment on TV was, they followed this family around for a week and tracked their spending. They ate dinner out, or got carryout, *every* night. The mom spent $75 per week on her hair and nails. They had a hired man to clean the pool.... It was really hard to pity them because they were about to lose their house. I've always thought there should be classes in high school to teach kids budgeting, how to buy a house, how to balance a checkbook. We learned those things on our own. We learned about credit cards the hard way. (I bet a lot of people do.) We were 18 years old, and pretty much on our own. Sherry > Very good points. I remember, when we were still just kids, getting > turned down by [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > hard way. (I bet a lot of people do.) We > were 18 years old, and pretty much on our own. They may have been taught the basics, or at least had to chance to read up on all the consumer financial advice put out by reputable credit counselling agencies, government advice services and some banks. Not everyone learns well. Some have to learn the hard way, and some never learn. Moreover (and this isn't original to me!<G>) we live in a consumer society. There is a lot of encouragement - sometimes even pressure - to live in an extravagant way. Not only do businesses and sometimes friends and relatives encourage people to think 'you deserve it!' 'everybody lives this way!' or 'If you want to succeed, you *must* dress/live/drive at this level' instead of 'can I afford it?'; there have been politicians who've made it practically patriotic to keep the economy going through spending on houses, cars and other consumer products. Debt doesn't have the stigma, or even a level of concern that would lead the debtor to think 'I gotta do something about this NOW; I'm paying a fortune in interest and if my job goes down the tubes, I'll be in a real mess.' Savings works the other ways around - it's boring to just have savings; if you do have - or can borrow - money, you should make it work! Invest it in real estate! You'll be rich! And people tend to believe what they're told over and over again by other people who seem to be rich and happy. Cheryl (happy enough to be considered an eccentric because I don't buy a lot of things others are convinced are essential!) >> Very good points. I remember, when we were still just kids, getting >> turned down by [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > Cheryl (happy enough to be considered an eccentric because I don't buy a > lot of things others are convinced are essential!) It really has passed the level of the absurd. But you can still pull of some admiration in some circles by mentioning that you have a stock broker. My current peeve. Really upsets me to see it. Cars with memorial messages across the back window. 'In loving memory of ....' Spending your inheritance on a car is bad enough, but then to feel you need to tell the world! What do you plan to do for the next generation. Jo > My current peeve. Really upsets me to see it. Cars with memorial messages > across the back window. 'In loving memory of ....' > Spending your inheritance on a car is bad enough, but then to feel you need > to tell the world! If someone puts "in memory of so-and-so" on their car, does that automatically mean that they've spent their inheritance on the car? I've never seen this or heard of it before. Anyway, what's wrong with someone spending their inheritance (or, if they're lucky, only part of it) on a car? Maybe they *need* a car. I thought people left money to their kids to help them with their living expenses, to survive, etc? My mother bought a condo with the money she inherited from my grandmother. Seemed like a reasonable thing to do, to me. So if it's a car you need, then why not buy a car? > What do you plan to do for the next generation. Are you saying that one shouldn't spend an inheritance, but rather, just pass it on to the next generation? Then who gets to spend it?? I don't understand the point of passing money on and on. Just wondering... SignatureJoyce To email me, remove the triple-X from my user name. ^..^ > > My current peeve. Really upsets me to see it. Cars with memorial messages > > across the back window. 'In loving memory of ....' [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > pass it on to the next generation? Then who gets to spend it?? I don't > understand the point of passing money on and on. Just wondering... My cousins Becky and Holly have "In Memory of" stickers on their cars, in memory of their sister Debbie who died after a valiant fight with cancer. I am going to see if they have any extras, so I can put one on my car. Funny thing happened concerning the sticker: Last year, my cousin Bart died of a massive coronary. Becky and Holly were going to another cousins house when they noticed a black truck following them. They got a bit nervous, so they made a couple of turns - the truck was still behind them. They decided to go to the cousins house, knowing that there were going to be a lot of people there, just in case. They stopped, and the truck stopped behind them... The young man got out and apologized for alarming them, and introduced himself. He was a cousin they hadn't seen since he was about 5. He had gotten lost on the way to the funeral home, and when he saw the memory sticker, he figured that whomever was driving would know where he needed to go. They had a good laugh over it. <G> Mishi > bastXXXe...@sonic.net wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > > Mishi > Moreover (and this isn't original to me!<G>) we live in a consumer > society. There is a lot of encouragement - sometimes even pressure - to [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > politicians who've made it practically patriotic to keep the economy > going through spending on houses, cars and other consumer products. Debt I've been a renter all my life, and at different times, I've felt various amounts of pressure to buy a house, or at least a condo. I was seriously thinking about it in 2000 or 2001. I didn't really want to buy a place, but I felt that I *should*. I don't usually cave in to social pressure in my personal choices - especially ones involving huge financial commitments - but this was during the dot com boom and everyone was buying houses. Then I lost my job and was unemployed for a few years, and lost all my savings, ie, my down payment, and that was that. I probably will never own a home, especially if I choose to stay in this region of the country (which I love). However, I've always been perfectly happy renting, and with all the crisis in the housing market, nobody's talking about buying anymore. SignatureJoyce To email me, remove the triple-X from my user name. ^..^ > I've been a renter all my life, and at different times, I've felt > various amounts of pressure to buy a house, or at least a condo. I [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > perfectly happy renting, and with all the crisis in the housing market, > nobody's talking about buying anymore. I've always rented, too. I just never saw the point of buying and tying all that money into four walls and a roof. If I had children, it would be different; then a house/flat/whatever would be an asset to pass on to them. The way our laws are now, if you will your property to anyone who is not a direct descendant, they have to pay huge inheritance taxes. I wouldn't want to burden my nieces and nephew with that, unless I could leave them the money to pay the taxes. And they would have to pay huge taxes on that money, too. SignatureMarina, Miranda and Caliban. In loving memory of Frank and Nikki. >> I've always thought there should be classes in high school to teach >> kids budgeting, how to buy a house, how to balance a checkbook. When I was in school, there WERE! (In fact, we learned how to balance a checkbook in sixth grade - and this was just a normal, public school in Minnesota.) >> I've always thought there should be classes in high school to teach >> kids budgeting, how to buy a house, how to balance a checkbook. > When I was in school, there WERE! (In fact, we learned how to balance a > checkbook in sixth grade - and this was just a normal, public school in > Minnesota.) Yes, it was called "Home Economics". But by the time I was in high school (late 60s-early 70s), they weren't teaching anything that remotely related to economics anymore. You learned either cooking or sewing. And the cooking classes were ridiculous. Let's see... one time we made this horrible, translucent hard candy that was extremely sticky and could cement your jaw closed, or at least, remove a few fillings. And for some ungodly reason, we colored it *green*. It was lime-flavored. Truly some of the worst candy I have ever eaten. After we made it, we were instructed to bring it around the school to give to boys or male teachers (Home Ec was all girls then). UGH!! I didn't do it. Not because I was a flaming feminist (yet), I just thought it was dumb. Perhaps I also didn't want to be responsible for anyone's emergency dental work. :) (It's suddenly occurring to me... I think this was sometime around March - I'll bet we did this for St Patty's day. This was Boston, after all. For what other earthly reason could we possibly have made that stuff???) What I learned from all that was that cooking is boring and produces worthless and possibly disgusting substances. I didn't learn to properly cook until well into my 20s, from various roommates who'd evidently had better instruction! The sewing classes were a lot more useful and I developed a skill that I have continued to use to this day. But it sure didn't help me balance my checkbook, create a budget, or understand basic economics such as compounded interest. SignatureJoyce To email me, remove the triple-X from my user name. ^..^ <bastXXXette > "EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > checkbook in sixth grade - and this was just a normal, public school in > > Minnesota.) Wow...good for you:) > Yes, it was called "Home Economics". But by the time I was in high school > (late 60s-early 70s), they weren't teaching anything that remotely related > to economics anymore. You learned either cooking or sewing. And the > cooking > classes were ridiculous. I was in High School form 1960-63 and yes the cooking classes were fun for us. > Let's see... one time we made this horrible, translucent hard candy that > was extremely sticky and could cement your jaw closed, or at least, remove [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I also didn't want to be responsible for anyone's emergency dental work. > :) And the boys took "Shop" classes. LOL...I remember wrecking the Driver's ed car. It wasn't my fault tho, we both had green lights, said the Judge. This was back in Denver. > (It's suddenly occurring to me... I think this was sometime around March - > I'll bet we did this for St Patty's day. This was Boston, after all. For > what other earthly reason could we possibly have made that stuff???) LOL > What I learned from all that was that cooking is boring and produces > worthless and possibly disgusting substances. I didn't learn to properly > cook until well into my 20s, from various roommates who'd evidently had > better instruction! I used to be a short order cook for a lot of years, and I loved it. and I still love to cook, altho DH is a much better cook than I am now. > The sewing classes were a lot more useful and I developed a skill that > I have continued to use to this day. But it sure didn't help me balance > my checkbook, create a budget, or understand basic economics such as > compounded interest. Gah...I never could sew a straight line. Failed that class. My Dad taught Math at the same HS I went to. Never was any good at math either. I was looking thru my 1962 and 63 yearbooks and they were a hoot!! Hug Kyla > >> I've always thought there should be classes in high school to teach > >> kids budgeting, how to buy a house, how to balance a checkbook. [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > my checkbook, create a budget, or understand basic economics such as > compounded interest. I graduated from high school in 1953. We didn't have Home Ec in high school, but we had a semester each of cooking and sewing in junior high. I found both useless. I learned to cook from my mother, and I taught myself to sew after I was married and had children. Our cooking teacher was a real tyrant. She insisted that we eat everything we cook. Since most of the things we made were awful, somebody would always ask, "Do we have to eat this?" She would always say yes. One day the concoction was particularly five. It was supposed to be Welsh rarebit, but we made it with canned tomato soup and Velveeta cheese. That day one of the girls got smart. Instead of saying, "Do we have to eat this?" she said, "Would you like a taste, Mrs. Cash?" Mrs. Cash tasted it and announced, "Girls, you don't have to eat this." That's my best Home Ec memory. Joy > Our cooking teacher was a real tyrant. She insisted that we eat everything > we cook. Since most of the things we made were awful, somebody would always [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > "Would you like a taste, Mrs. Cash?" Mrs. Cash tasted it and announced, > "Girls, you don't have to eat this." That's my best Home Ec memory. Great story - smart girl! :) Joyce PS - I guess "Mrs. Cash" didn't teach you about managing money? :) To email me, remove the triple-X from my user name. ^..^ For a very brief period when I was in Grade 7 or 8, my small rural school offered home economics. They didn't have a proper facility for it with stoves and everything, so we did no cooking, only sewing, and not much of that. We made three different styles of aprons. I actually found that class extremely useful, because with that small beginning and encouragement, I taught myself to follow more complicated patterns and while not an expert, can make clothes and curtains, which not only saves money but enables me to choose the kind of fabrics and styles I want even when they're out of fashion and hard or impossible to find in the stores. My mother had a sewing machine, but disliked sewing and never did any, so I wouldn't have learned at home. My grandmother could sew and do all kinds of needlework well, but by that stage in her life she was doing little sewing, although she always encouraged me to knit and crochet. What we did not do (besides cooking!) was any kind of budgeting or financial planning. Many years later when I had another encounter with the local education system, there was a course in consumer math offered in some schools - but it was intended for the slower students. Students who studied the math courses require for admission into a post-secondary institution must have been assumed not to need that kind of information, or to be able to pick it up themselves! Cheryl > we did no cooking, only sewing, and not > much of that. We made three different styles of aprons. I actually found [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > even when they're out of fashion and hard or impossible to find in the > stores. Exactly! I've made all the curtains and pillow covers in my house for that reason. Another great thing about sewing: alterations. I've become pretty adept at this and have been able to take ill-fitting second-hand clothes and make them look good on me. > there was a course in consumer math offered > in some schools - but it was intended for the slower students. Students > who studied the math courses require for admission into a post-secondary > institution must have been assumed not to need that kind of information, > or to be able to pick it up themselves! Ha! I have a degree in math, with a 4.0 average. And I don't know how to balance a checkbook!! I have mental blocks about money-related math. Actually, I've never liked arithmetic, and that did affect me when learning some higher math, such as calculus, which gets into a lot of equation-solving and formulas, etc. I did a lot better in more abstract kinds of math, that were more about proofs. I'm much better at logic than I am at arithmetic operations. SignatureJoyce To email me, remove the triple-X from my user name. ^..^ > <bastXXXe...@sonic.net> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 54 lines] > "Girls, you don't have to eat this." That's my best Home Ec memory. > Joy We were forced (non-elective) to take Home Ec at my high school, first semester we cooked oatmeal. We were sneakier (not smarter, sneakier) than your class, Joy. One by one, we shoved it around in our bowls and filed to the nearby bathroom to dump it and return w/our bowls to our tables. Second semester was "sewing" and we were making skirts when someone I was friendly with stole my wallet and was outed for this right in class. I pretended to be so traumatized by this happening that I was sent to the nurse and then to the principle's office, where I was then allowed to *drop* mandated H.E. class, receiving only one semester's credit, and instead choose an elective....Junior Band, where the teach was a friend of my family. I still despise sewing but can repair rips and button replacement. Killer baker, though. H.E. didn't bake, even in advanced classes. > We were forced (non-elective) to take Home Ec at my high school, We had mandatory home economics (cooking) for one or two years in upper comprehensive, but in high school it became optional and all the boys dropped out. I think, even if one or two of the boys would have liked to continue, the peer pressure was too hard to be 'manly' and not take cooking. :o/ Sewing and other crafts was a different class, and mandatory for girls while 'shop' was mandatory for boys. Until it changed, and you had to take one or the other. I and one other girl from my class transferred to shop, but the teacher just clean ignored us, and we couldn't take it in the long run, so returned to sewing. I was so young and stupid (now I'm just stupid) that I fully believed that adults know what they're doing, so I thought it was as it should be when the shop teacher ignored us. It still makes me mad. I knew how to sew, knit and crochet, because Mum had taught me at home, and I could make much more interesting stuff at home than what our crafts teacher made us do. Shop would have been much more useful for me. I had done basic things on the island; I knew how to whittle, drive in nails, plane wood. I'd have liked to go on from there. I hear that both subjects are mandatory for everyone these days. I'm glad the attitudes have changed. SignatureMarina, Miranda and Caliban. In loving memory of Frank and Nikki. > > We were forced (non-elective) to take Home Ec at my high school, > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > -- > Marina, Miranda and Caliban. In loving memory of Frank and Nikki. Heh. Our "Home Ec" class was a joke. Our teacher brought her laundry from home to "teach us to iron." She spent an entire week teaching us to make "white sauce", which to this day I have no clue what to do with it. (I'm sure Jill knows!) We made these horrid a-line skirts with suspenders that none of us would be caught dead in. The only thing I learned in that class that stuck with me, was her telling us that when we were in cars with boys on a date to be sure to keep our legs together because boys would use the chrome reflection on the dash to look up our dresses. (????). Sherry > Heh. Our "Home Ec" class was a joke. Our teacher brought her laundry > from [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > look up our > dresses. (????). Your teacher must have grown up when girls were told that if they wore those shiny patent leather shoes, boys would be able to see their panties reflected in them! I wonder how many people actually believed such stories? Besides your teacher, that is (unless she was joking). When I was in school, shorter skirts were becoming popular. They'd probably look very tame today, but at the time they were considered very fashionable and perhaps a bit risque. One of our teachers wanted to try something different than the very traditional regimented rows of seats we were used to, and had us arrange our desks in a circle for one or two classes. Some of my more fashionable female classmates tugged nervously at the hems of their skirts, convinced the (young, male) teacher and/or their male classmates could see up their skirts! That particular seating arrangement didn't last long, although I don't know if the skirts had anything to do with changing back to the old ways. Cheryl > When I was in school, shorter skirts were becoming popular. They'd > probably look very tame today, but at the time they were considered very [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Cheryl Even when I was young I found that very annoying. Woman /young_lady wears cloths that barely fit to be attractive / fashionable and ends up tugging at herself constantly. As a guy I can't imagine anything _less_ attractive. Don't get me wrong, I like short skirts on woman but not if they are uncomfortable in them. Comfort is sexy, discomfort looks immature. Andy >Your teacher must have grown up when girls were told that if they wore >those shiny patent leather shoes, boys would be able to see their >panties reflected in them! I wonder how many people actually believed >such stories? It was in our school uniform code! We were not allowed patent leather shoes because men could see the reflection of your knickers in them! My school uniform code- it was 30 pages or so long.....Just one example - everything had to have a name tape sewn into it- my mother swore she ruined her eyesight doing those tapes! Lesley Slave of the Fabulous Furballs > >Your teacher must have grown up when girls were told that if they wore > >those shiny patent leather shoes, boys would be able to see their [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Slave of the Fabulous Furballs The only things I remember about our school dress code handbook is, with our arms at our sides, our dresses couldn't be shorter than 1" below the fingertips. (that's pretty short!!!)....Boys' hair could not touch their collar. Twenty years later, my daughter's school handbook said things like "Underwear must not be worn as outerwear". I'd *never* heard the patent-leather thing! That's a scream. Sherry Even at the school for the Blind, we were told the thing about the patent shoes. I know the way guys used to polish their shoes in the military, I don't think this would have even been true there. On May 12, 4:09 am, "Lesley via CatKB.com" <u27720@uwe> wrote: > Cheryl P. wrote: > >Your teacher must have grown up when girls were told that if they wore [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Slave of the Fabulous Furballs The only things I remember about our school dress code handbook is, with our arms at our sides, our dresses couldn't be shorter than 1" below the fingertips. (that's pretty short!!!)....Boys' hair could not touch their collar. Twenty years later, my daughter's school handbook said things like "Underwear must not be worn as outerwear". I'd *never* heard the patent-leather thing! That's a scream. Sherry > The only things I remember about our school dress code handbook is, > with our arms at our sides, our dresses couldn't be shorter than 1" [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > "Underwear must not be worn as outerwear". > I'd *never* heard the patent-leather thing! That's a scream. We didn't have a dress code, which made us rather odd since at the time most schools in the area required uniforms. The uniforms are mostly, although not entirely, gone now, and most schools have rules consisting of stuff like 'Students may not wear T-shirts with slogans or pictures that are obscene/promote drug and/or alcohol use'. I hadn't heard about the underwear thing, although there were usually one or two girls who appeared to have mistaken a blouse for a dress. Cheryl > The only things I remember about our school dress code handbook is, > with our arms at our sides, our dresses couldn't be shorter than 1" > below the fingertips. (that's pretty short!!!)....Boys' hair could not > touch their collar. You must have been in high school around the same time I was. Skirt length on girls and hair length on boys were the main concerns at the time. We had a hawk-eyed prude working in the principle's office who would stand right outside the office and glare at the hems of the girls' skirts as we walked by. Anyone wearing one considered too short was nabbed and made to sit "on the bench". (The bench right inside the principle's office, it was analogous to being "detained".) In the fall of 1969, school dress codes were declared illegal in the United States, so the hawk-eye didn't have much to do after that. :) > Twenty years later, my daughter's school handbook said things like > "Underwear must not be worn as outerwear". LOL! The aftermath of Madonna. :) SignatureJoyce To email me, remove the triple-X from my user name. ^..^ > > The only things I remember about our school dress code handbook is, > > with our arms at our sides, our dresses couldn't be shorter than 1" [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > nabbed and made to sit "on the bench". (The bench right inside the > principle's office, it was analogous to being "detained".) When mini-skirts came into fashion, back in the 1960's, our company rules said they could not be more than an inch above the knee. I remember one of my bosses down on his knees with a yardstick, measuring! Mostly as a joke - he had six daughters, and often treated the staff as though we were an extension of his family. (That was long before anyone would have even THOUGHT of it as "sexual harassment") >> Your teacher must have grown up when girls were told that if they >> wore those shiny patent leather shoes, boys would be able to see [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Slave of the Fabulous Furballs That reminds me of a story I once heard, about a little girl on her first day at school, she told her mother when she got home that the boys kept looking at her knickers, so she took them off. ;-) I think childrens logic can be amusing sometimes. SignatureAdrian (Owned by Snoopy, Bagheera & Shadow) Cats leave pawprints on your heart http://community.webshots.com/user/clowderuk >> Your teacher must have grown up when girls were told that if they wore >> those shiny patent leather shoes, boys would be able to see their >> panties reflected in them! I wonder how many people actually believed >> such stories? The somewhat elderly "old maid" Dean of Women at my liberal arts college (back in the late 1940's) told her Freshman girls' seminar we should never wear red, because it excited men's baser nature. :-) (No, we didn't ALL wear red the next day - some of us didn't happen to have any red garments in our wardrobes.) > Sewing and other crafts was a different class, and mandatory for girls > while 'shop' was mandatory for boys. Until it changed, and you had to > take one or the other. I and one other girl from my class transferred to > shop, but the teacher just clean ignored us, and we couldn't take it in > the long run, so returned to sewing. Ooooh, that really burns me. I once took a woodworking class as an adult (at adult ed), and the guy didn't know how to talk to women, so he either ignored us, or was brusque and uninformative. I finally quit the class because I couldn't stand being treated that way, but not before I fired off an angry letter to the administrator of the school. It is so much harder when you're a kid. And I don't think it's stupid to assume, when you're young, that adults know what they're doing. Imagine how scary the world would seem if you were able to figure out that they don't! > Shop would have been much more > useful for me. I had done basic things on the island; I knew how to > whittle, drive in nails, plane wood. I'd have liked to go on from there. Did you eventually learn any woodshop skills on your own? My sister was the first girl to take shop at my high school. She was 3 years behind me in school, and I had already graduated by the time she did it. This was in the mid-1970s. She's the type of person that people tend to respect, so I don't think she got a lot of crap for being there. After that, girls were allowed to take shop, but it wasn't until later that everyone had to take both shop and cooking. (By this point, such classes might well have been eliminated in some schools due to cutbacks, so the point is now moot...) SignatureJoyce To email me, remove the triple-X from my user name. ^..^ Marina kirjoitti: >> We were forced (non-elective) to take Home Ec at my high school, > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > I hear that both subjects are mandatory for everyone these days. I'm > glad the attitudes have changed. We never had cooking in our school. Crafts yes, but not cooking. But then I didn't go to a Finnish school. With crafts it was as Marina said, sewing / knitting etc. for girls and shop for boys. We were able to switch at some point and I did some shop for a while. That teacher didn't ignore girls, but then he didn't have us make very interesting things either. Christine in Laitila, Finland ...who seems to have lost her sig due to computer problems... > Yes, it was called "Home Economics". But by the time I was in high school > (late 60s-early 70s), they weren't teaching anything that remotely related > to economics anymore. You learned either cooking or sewing. And the > cooking > classes were ridiculous. Your translucent candy sounds like hard taffy to me. Nasty stuff. I was never taught money management by either parents or schools. I had to go out, make major mistakes, and learn on my own. I still have a problem with finances. Rob's parents assumed that he was picking it up from them. Again, a lot of major mistakes and so forth. As the kids grew up, I would give them our old check books from the banks that we no longer used (easier to change banks with posts) and teach them how to write checks. I also showed them the little bank book and taught them that this is where you record all your checks and balance the account. Then I took them to the rent to own places, handed them calculators and had them add up the payments and compare them to real world prices (yes, Rob and I got caught in this one as well. We still have some of the furniture that we shelled out three times the worth of it.) Then I took them to the pay day lenders and let them do the math there. (We weren't caught in this scam, but knew a lot of young soldiers and their families who were) Then I took them, the calculators, and the shopping list to the grocery store, utilities, car dealerships, and so forth. When it came time to open bank accounts for their VA payments and Pell Grants, each did their own research. I understand why they chose the banks they did, though I didn't always agree with them on it. I also let them go over the rental ads in the paper so they could see how much they'd be paying for housing if they were on their own. Then I charged them $100/month rent. They each have jobs around the house to do. If they don't do them, they pay a monetary forfeit. Less than they'd be coughing up in the real world, but still enough to teach them to do the work. I'm hoping that they make fewer mistakes than Rob and I did. Pam S, >> Yes, it was called "Home Economics". But by the time I was in high school >> (late 60s-early 70s), they weren't teaching anything that remotely [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > Pam S, Great parenting, Pam - it's a shame more people don't do this (I know I could have used some of those lessons when I was young). Hugs, CatNipped > Your translucent candy sounds like hard taffy to me. Nasty stuff. > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > how to write checks. I also showed them the little bank book and taught > them that this is where you record all your checks and balance the account. <snip> > Pam S, It's so important to teach the kids what you taught them, Pam! Best wishes, Polonca and Soncek > > Cheryl P. wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Yes, it was called "Home Economics". Actually, it was called "Arithmetic" ;-) >>> When I was in school, there WERE! (In fact, we learned how to balance a >>> checkbook in sixth grade - and this was just a normal, public school in >>> Minnesota.) >> Yes, it was called "Home Economics". > Actually, it was called "Arithmetic" ;-) LOL. :) SignatureJoyce To email me, remove the triple-X from my user name. ^..^ On May 6, 3:12 pm, "EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" <evgm...@earthlink.net> wrote: > >> I've always thought there should be classes in high school to teach > >> kids budgeting, how to buy a house, how to balance a checkbook. > > When I was in school, there WERE! (In fact, we learned how to balance a > checkbook in sixth grade - and this was just a normal, public school in > Minnesota.) We learned all that stuff in my junior year in high school. The elective class (you don't know how many times I've said a silent blessing to the young, "with-i" teach we had) was called, strangely, "Business Math 1" hopitus <hopitus@hotmail.com> wrote in news:992e67fa-7b45-40d5-90de- edec780a03cc@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com: > On May 6, 3:12 pm, "EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" > <evgm...@earthlink.net> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > said a silent blessing to the young, "with-i" teach we had) > was called, strangely, "Business Math 1" I always remember the "Economics for Survival" course I took in my Junior year (1972). It covered check-books, insurance policies, credit cards, bank loans, door to door sales and a few other things including _advertising_. I think it lasted only a few semesters. Andy raises hand, and screams amen, Lee > > Very good points. I remember, when we were still just kids, getting > > turned down by [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > Cheryl (happy enough to be considered an eccentric because I don't buy a > lot of things others are convinced are essential!) >> They spent the past five years pushing equity loans on people. And >> made a fortune doing it. Then walk away when everything comes [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > simply because they bought homes more expensive than what they could > afford. AMEN! I shudder to think what would happen if my middle brother lost his job. He already had a very nice 3 bedroom house (for 10 years) in a good neighborhood. He lives alone; he has absolutely no need for a 5 bedroom 5000 sq. ft. house, but that's what he built 2 years ago. You'd think he would have been more cautious since it was only about 2 years prior to that he lost his job of over 15 years when the company relocated. (In fact, if it weren't for a former co-worker who went out and formed his own company then offered him a job, who knows what position he'd be in right now?) Granted, I can't say his new house is beyond his means. Obviously he had proceeds from the sale of his old home to put towards the new one. And I certainly don't know what type of loan he got. But he's got a hell of a lot of house to pay for if something unexpected happens. Jill > Well, yeah, it's opportunistic, it's predatory lending. But, don't you > think *some* accountability rests with the borrower? I'm not talking [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > simply because they bought homes more expensive than what they could > afford. Probably true, but there is an astonishing number of people out there who are quite ignorant about what they can and cannot afford. All it takes is a slick realtor more concerned with his commissions than his client's needs, and a not terribly scrupulous loan officer, and they're quickly in debt way over their heads. >> Well, yeah, it's opportunistic, it's predatory lending. But, don't you >> think *some* accountability rests with the borrower? I'm not talking [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > needs, and a not terribly scrupulous loan officer, and they're quickly in > debt way over their heads. We did a "credit score zone" test for how much house we could afford (and actually made a loan for considerably less than we were approved for). However, 2 weeks after closing, I lost my job (Ben was working as house husband back then and didn't have a paying job). I had to take a job for half what I was making - so there went the "credit score zone" results right out of the window. Thank goodness we had been conservative about the loan we made or we probably would have lost the house almost as soon as we'd moved in (as it is, we're still living in a dilapidated "fixer-upper" that we've never been able to fix). As it is, the FIRST thing we pay each month is our house note (even before doing groceries) - every other bill collector can wait their turn, but we need a roof over our heads. I guess what I'm saying is that, even if you don't buy too much house for your pocketbook, situations can change drastically overnight - and in this society where most people live paycheck to paycheck, you can be out on the street in a heartbeat. Hugs, CatNipped >>> Well, yeah, it's opportunistic, it's predatory lending. But, don't >>> you think *some* accountability rests with the borrower? I'm not [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > CatNipped Yep, that's our situation, too, CatNipped. This house was $55,000 when we bought it, but now we're both basically unemployed, we can't afford it. Situations change. Still, it's more expensive to rent than to keep trying to pay this. We're not going to live out of our car with three cats and 2 rats, you know? We've got to do the best we can paying the mortgage, property tax, premiums and insurance. We're already talking about cutting off the phone and the cable, but I need the phone for my Dr.'s. I've got my fingers crossed that things will pick up soon. kili >>> Well, yeah, it's opportunistic, it's predatory lending. But, don't you >>> think *some* accountability rests with the borrower? I'm not talking [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > society where most people live paycheck to paycheck, you can be out on the > street in a heartbeat. A fact of which I never lose sight! So far I'm managing to live on my "fixed" income, but as prices continue to increase, and our government talks about "adjusting" Social Security to balance the budget, who knows about next year? sure would document and share with the FBI, Lee > I was told the other day that the FBI is investigating "Country Wide" > mortgage company along with Wells Fargo Mortgage company. And guess why [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Pam S, >I was told the other day that the FBI is investigating "Country Wide" >mortgage company along with Wells Fargo Mortgage company. And guess why [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Pam S, Dear gawd, how awful!!! It's hard to believe that they would do something like that now, with the market for real estate so soft. But it agrees with my (conspiracy?) theory though, that what happened in New Orleans is now happening elsewhere. The city of New Orleans is cooperating with large corporations to take land away from homeowners and sell it to the corporations so they can build "yuppie condos" and make a killing. What they've been doing is, when owners can't fix their homes (most are still without jobs since businesses in the area are still recovering), the city will bulldoze the house and then charge the homeowner for it. If the homeowner can't pay for the bulldozing, the city confiscates the home/land and then sells it. It's heartbreaking what's happening to our once productive and robust country. The American dream has turned into a nightmare! Hugs, CatNipped > The city of New Orleans is cooperating with large > corporations to take land away from homeowners and sell it to the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > It's heartbreaking what's happening to our once productive and robust > country. The American dream has turned into a nightmare! That is absolutely *UNBELIVABLE* and completely outrageous!!! Helen M > The city of New Orleans is cooperating with large > corporations to take land away from homeowners and sell it to the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > It's heartbreaking what's happening to our once productive and robust > country. The American dream has turned into a nightmare! That is absolutely *UNBELIVABLE* and completely outrageous!!! Helen M ================================================== I really believe the US is in crisis - our government has catered to big businesses for so long now that the "middle class" is becoming extinct. The top 1% of our population makes about 90% of the money here. More and more people are losing their homes (OB people are turning in cats and other pets to shelters in record numbers because they no longer have any place to live), small businesses are going bankrupt, it's really, really scary to live here right now. Hugs, CatNipped Those people that this happens to about knocking down their homes, need to contact every news agency on the planet. I know three people who lost their homes because they couldn't pay the mortgage. However, and this will make me no friends here, all of them bought way over their heads. The banks should have not given the loan but, if even I, who am math impaired, knew they were biting off more than they should have been able to chew, each also had a new car payment and kids, they should have known this too. I know crap happens and a lot of the time it is unintended. But, bottom line to me is WHY do so many people have to start out a marriage, life or whatever, at the point it took their parents 40 years to get to? My kids are included in this question. >> The city of New Orleans is cooperating with large >> corporations to take land away from homeowners and sell it to the [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > CatNipped > Those people that this happens to about knocking down their homes, > need to contact every news agency on the planet. But lots of people take advantage of "disasters". I don't automaticall lay all that at the feet of the government. My ex-, Ray, was a carpenter. He used to go help rebuild in the wake of hurricanes. (In fact, he may well be dead because when he heard about Katrina the first thing he would have done was charge down there to be with his remaining family members in Bay St. Louis, MS, which was wiped off the map.) He told me outrageous stories of price gouging by everyone. Need lumber? The price just went up 50%. Need an electrician? Sure, but our rates are now $200/hr. rather than $75. And we're talking *years* before GW was in office, so you can't blame the sitting President. THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T HAVE A MONOPOLY ON GREED. > I know three people who lost their homes because they couldn't pay the > mortgage. However, and this will make me no friends here, all of them [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > whatever, at the point it took their parents 40 years to get to? My > kids are included in this question As I mentioned in reply to Sherry's post, my single brother sold a very nice 3 br/2ba house in a good neighborhood and built a 5 br/4 ba house. Question: Why does a single person with no kids need 2 more bedrooms and 2 more bathrooms to clean? Answer: Keeping up with the Joneses. |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message