Dersom man driter i å betale boliglånet.

[virgule82]

Keystone tar feil her. I teorien er man personlig ansvarlig for boliglån de fleste steder i USA, men praksis skjer det nesten aldri at banken krever resten av lånet. Denne artikkelen forklarer problemstillingen.

 

http://www.creditslips.org/creditslips/200...ole-of-rec.html

 

"recourse" betyr at man står personlig ansvarlig, "garnishment" betyr inndragelse av lønn og "deficiency judgment " betyr at banken faktisk får krevd inn restbeløpet.

 

Second, Feldstein doesn’t seem to get the real value of recourse. The fact that a loan is called “recourse” doesn’t actually mean that it will be recourse in practice. It’s costly and time consuming to persue deficiency judgments on foreclosures. State property exemption laws often protect debtors’ assets, and wage garnishment requires a debtor with a job and can take a long time given federal and state garnishment limitations. And the debtor can always file for bankruptcy and get rid of the unsecured deficiency debt. As a financial matter, recourse doesn’t have a whole lot of value, and lenders often do not pursue deficiency judgments.

 

Instead, the primary value of recourse lending is as a threat. But here’s the thing. Most homeowners, if asked, would assume that their mortgage is recourse, regardless of whether it is or not. Thus whatever in terrorem effect exists from recourse is already in place, regardless of whether or not it is legally enforceable. (And the really sophisticated borrowers know that even if a loan is recourse, they can probably arrange a short sale in which the deficiency is forgiven.)

[magicgunnar]

I praksis kan det altså være "lurt" å kjøpe lavinnskuddsleiligheter, fordi man kun står i fare for å miste innskuddet, dersom alt går ad dundas.

Problemet er gjerne at de andre i blokka kan få betalingsproblemer og dermed står du i fare for å miste ditt innskudd selv om du kan betale.