And by the way, I think this one of the most interesting posts I've seen in a while.
Ultimately, some of the financial loss I've handed to the bank is being taken care of by taxes I've paid. So, between that and the fact that I did try to work with them I think any moral obligation to them is over. Even if that weren't the case, I still might have done it. Their policies are the reason my house was so expensive in the first place, and then lost so much value. They made all kinds of money during the housing boom, so it's only fair if they take some of the loss.
I would feel like I let my neighbors down, but my foreclosure didn't drop their property values at all. The banks here in Bakersfield are already holding so much inventory that the market will stay stable as long as they only sell it off bit by bit, which they have been. My foreclosure will only make the recovery in my city take a tiny bit longer. So really, not much of a moral obligation there either.
I think it was just hard to put it in the right perspective while the process was happenning. Thus the lost sleep.
Ultimately, some of the financial loss I've handed to the bank is being taken care of by taxes I've paid. So, between that and the fact that I did try to work with them I think any moral obligation to them is over. Even if that weren't the case, I still might have done it. Their policies are the reason my house was so expensive in the first place, and then lost so much value. They made all kinds of money during the housing boom, so it's only fair if they take some of the loss.
I would feel like I let my neighbors down, but my foreclosure didn't drop their property values at all. The banks here in Bakersfield are already holding so much inventory that the market will stay stable as long as they only sell it off bit by bit, which they have been. My foreclosure will only make the recovery in my city take a tiny bit longer. So really, not much of a moral obligation there either.
I think it was just hard to put it in the right perspective while the process was happenning. Thus the lost sleep.
Is walking away from a mortgage immoral?
12/10/2010 04:45:43 PM
- 1442 Views
Just as a contract is a two way street -
12/10/2010 05:12:09 PM
- 948 Views
Of course it's immoral.
12/10/2010 05:13:16 PM
- 910 Views
But does one sided morality work?
12/10/2010 05:38:56 PM
- 1036 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
- 831 Views
A company or organization cannot act morally or immorally? I strongly disagree. *NM*
12/10/2010 07:50:42 PM
- 409 Views
No, it cannot. However the individuals making the decisions for the company can. *NM*
12/10/2010 08:48:23 PM
- 356 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
- 897 Views
I'm not absolved of my obligations based on the bad behaviors of others.
12/10/2010 08:25:33 PM
- 813 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
- 997 Views
That's the only kind of morality there is! What the hell is wrong with you?
12/10/2010 08:15:55 PM
- 855 Views
nothing wrong with me but I think you are off your meds again
12/10/2010 09:34:33 PM
- 859 Views
Re: nothing wrong with me but I think you are off your meds again
15/10/2010 02:50:49 PM
- 1357 Views
well I really can't argue with the wrong is wrong end of story belief system
15/10/2010 05:40:22 PM
- 1052 Views
A contract isn't a promise; it's a legal agreement. *NM*
12/10/2010 06:25:24 PM
- 430 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
- 896 Views
I would agree with you if contracts didn't provide for breaking them.
12/10/2010 07:33:15 PM
- 745 Views
Hrm.
12/10/2010 07:35:38 PM
- 954 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
- 426 Views
Let's assume we're talking about a marriage where no such oath was taken... *NM*
12/10/2010 08:10:54 PM
- 439 Views
if there is no oath of fidelity then straying would not be immoral *NM*
12/10/2010 08:40:53 PM
- 409 Views
It's not immoral to break the marriage contract.
12/10/2010 08:19:50 PM
- 1008 Views
That must be why they have you sign something called an agreementory note
*NM*
12/10/2010 07:33:32 PM
- 441 Views

I don't think it's immoral at all. The contract usually specifies penalties for breach.
12/10/2010 05:28:34 PM
- 999 Views
You didn't mention the third party
12/10/2010 08:26:56 PM
- 776 Views
in a way I did since I did mention society
12/10/2010 08:54:07 PM
- 917 Views
What if you look at it from the other perspective?
12/10/2010 09:00:20 PM
- 923 Views
Sure, you could do that.
13/10/2010 01:54:55 AM
- 934 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
- 807 Views
As a professional in financial services - no, it is not.
13/10/2010 01:44:18 AM
- 877 Views
but almost nobody sees it that way
13/10/2010 12:53:25 PM
- 872 Views
Is the deal that if you default, the bank gets the house and nothing else, though?
13/10/2010 02:40:48 PM
- 866 Views
I think it's morally wrong to walk away from credit card debt. *NM*
13/10/2010 09:43:11 PM
- 407 Views
I agree, what do you think is different?
13/10/2010 09:59:36 PM
- 892 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
- 393 Views
I too am unable to work out what distinguishes the two situations.
13/10/2010 11:54:15 PM
- 827 Views
I lost sleep over it, but I did it anyway.
13/10/2010 05:24:19 AM
- 965 Views
OK what if you take it a step further
13/10/2010 03:44:30 PM
- 910 Views
Good question
14/10/2010 05:13:41 AM
- 936 Views
Obviously, the essential difference is can't pay versus won't pay.
13/10/2010 02:16:07 PM
- 847 Views
are you socializing your debt when it is a private bank?
13/10/2010 03:14:48 PM
- 925 Views
You are when said bank requires a bailout. And very many of them do.
13/10/2010 03:22:59 PM
- 868 Views
I really don't understand a system where this could be an advantage.
13/10/2010 11:16:57 PM
- 880 Views
There's generally something like a 7 or 10 year limit on credit reporting here.
13/10/2010 11:46:58 PM
- 893 Views
What's the use of suing someone who has no money? *NM*
13/10/2010 11:48:47 PM
- 467 Views
You can garnish their wages.
13/10/2010 11:49:36 PM
- 868 Views
With parsley?
13/10/2010 11:51:37 PM
- 936 Views
No, "someone" most certainly did not, wicked young Miss! Hmph! *NM*
13/10/2010 11:52:40 PM
- 453 Views
If they suddenly come into some, you're entitled to it. *NM*
14/10/2010 12:07:34 AM
- 533 Views
Bit of a long shot. *NM*
14/10/2010 12:09:12 AM
- 390 Views
Very. Best to cover your bases though. *NM*
14/10/2010 10:04:25 PM
- 416 Views
Not if the doctrine of election applies.
14/10/2010 10:14:07 PM
- 850 Views
Are we not talking about credit companies going after people who owe them money?
14/10/2010 10:18:47 PM
- 891 Views
I am currently in that situation...
14/10/2010 05:03:23 AM
- 981 Views
In Washington you can contest the assessed value used to determine property taxes.
14/10/2010 07:27:02 AM
- 922 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
- 406 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
- 904 Views