Update: Trying to avoid foreclosure by working with the bank on a quick sale #132 - Page 13

[bc1995]

Jennica, thanks for the update! I am so glad to hear it has all worked out for you!

[Tofu the Geek]

Thanks for the update! I am also glad this worked out. Sounds like you will a lot less stress now!

[Peppermint Leaf]

I am so glad everything worked out for you. Can you explain to me what "Short Sale" is?

[sarasprings]

Thanks for the update. I'm glad it worked out for you.

[jennica]

Originally Posted by Decluttering Nut

I am so glad everything worked out for you. Can you explain to me what "Short Sale" is?

A short sale, or a quick sale, is when you owe more on your home then what it is currently worth, and you cannot afford to pay the mortgage payments anymore. Typically, your only option would be to go into foreclosure, but, if you work with the bank and prove that you can't afford your payments and that you have already tried selling the house for what you owe on it (60 days on the market is standard), they may allow a short sale. If they do allow one, then you lower the price of your home and wait for offers. Then the tricky part is getting the bank to accept an offer, this typically takes about 60 to 90 days, so having multiple offers is good in case one backs out. So, when it's all said and done, the bank gets all the money and they forgive whatever it was you owed over that. If you are insolvent there is no tax issue either, so you walk away clear of any debt, but with a 100 point drop on your credit score.

[annethcz]

I was just thinking about you yesterday when I drove through your town (or your former town?). I'm so glad that everything worked out, I can't imagine how stressful the situation must've been.

[jennica]

Originally Posted by annethcz

I was just thinking about you yesterday when I drove through your town (or your former town?). I'm so glad that everything worked out, I can't imagine how stressful the situation must've been.

We're living in two houses right now. Well actually, we're slowly moving and cleaning, and painting the apartment while we slowly pack up the old house. We close on the 7th and move on the 8th! I'm very excited, we found an apartment in a great area of the cities.

[Emmeline II]

Happy to see it worked out for you.

[sophmama]

Originally Posted by jennica

A short sale, or a quick sale, is when you owe more on your home then what it is currently worth, and you cannot afford to pay the mortgage payments anymore. Typically, your only option would be to go into foreclosure, but, if you work with the bank and prove that you can't afford your payments and that you have already tried selling the house for what you owe on it (60 days on the market is standard), they may allow a short sale. If they do allow one, then you lower the price of your home and wait for offers. Then the tricky part is getting the bank to accept an offer, this typically takes about 60 to 90 days, so having multiple offers is good in case one backs out. So, when it's all said and done, the bank gets all the money and they forgive whatever it was you owed over that. If you are insolvent there is no tax issue either, so you walk away clear of any debt, but with a 100 point drop on your credit score.

I'm looking at this too right now. Our long-term planning had us selling our one-bedroom condo right now. My husband finished grad school and we've got 2 kids and we're so tight for space (and sanity and sleep) in this space. We bought the place for 218k, saw it soar in value to 250k and now it's likely 190k (should hear back from the appraiser today). We're in an ARM that resets next year, but we'd originally planned to sell at this point, so we hadn't worried about this. If we can refinance now we will, I think, but it looks like we won't be able to due to being upside down so far.

I thought you couldn't even negotiate a short sale until you were in default. Is it really only a ding of 100 points on your credit score? That would leave me in the 700's after the fact! That would be great!

I'm in an 80/20 so I realize I'd have to get both loan holder's to agree. I may be able to pay down the second mortgage some, but then I'd have to come up with realtor fee money. I wonder if any realtors would let me pay them after the fact in payments (family friends, etc.).

My husband and I are really worried about being stuck here for 5 years with our kids and a soaring interest rate that we will be treading water to keep up with.

I realize plenty of people use words like 'greedy speculators' to describe people like us. We are very very frugal and thought we were living within our means. There are TONS of calculators out there that say we are well within the correct percentages on debt to income, etc., but we're way over the 2.5X or 25% on our mortgage. In fact when we moved in we were about 80% of our net going to the mortgage. We just ate rice and beans. We never put anything on credit cards or anything. We paid for my husband's schooling on his less than 40k income while paying this mortgage. Now we're less than 50%, but it's still a lot.

Why did we buy? Because EVERYONE we knew and trusted, family, parents, friends, real estate agents, mortgage brokers, business people said, "Get something NOW before you're priced out forever." They were wrong and the few old articles I found online giving more conservative advice were overwhelmed by 'experts' saying the opposite. We were wrong and we are screwed - no doubt. I don't know if a 'bailout' is good for society as a whole (to foot the bill out of government revenues), but it would help.

Where can I find out for real what happens to us in a short sale? I'm going to talk to a lawyer friend I think and see if I can send a letter to my lender saying we anticipate not being able to make our payments soon and would like to work something out since we cannot sell for what we owe.

[CathMac]

Originally Posted by jennica

... In one to two years time it should be all cleared up, as long as we are smart with our credit.

jennica,
I'm so happy for you. ~Cath

[eggplant]

Originally Posted by CathMac

chinakat and Knittin' in the Shade,
Would it kill either of you to temper your harsh comments with helpful or constructive advice or at least some words of encouragement?

My impression, FWIW, is that she would like to honor her obligation. However, she wouldn't be much of a Mom if she didn't at least think about the cost to her DC in terms of quality of life and longterm savings when you consider the possibility that they could become slaves to this mortgage only to wind up losing the house anyway.

How often do you think her DC would see her parents if they worked as much as it sounds like they'd need to, especially when you factor in commuting. And what kind of shape do you think they'd be in when DC did see them?

My guess is that she is tired, overwhelmed and possibly depressed. It may well have been easier for her to stick her head in the sand and post here after the house was in foreclosure. I suspect both of you would have been more compassionate then and yet in this scenario she is trying to be responsible.

JMO, ~Cath

I think that part of the problem is that there's a difference between "trying" to be responsible, or thinking of being responsible, or looking into being responsible, and actually *being* responsible. Yes, many of the things she's (you're, for the OP, since I don't want to talk about her rather than to her/you) asking about are being shut down. But I still don't think that's a reason to just bail on it all, either for reasons of integrity, or for more practical reasons of the likelihood that doing so will make many future choices far more limited.

Yeah, it sucks that sometimes people get into situations where their choices aren't ideal. And maybe they have to go through a period of not seeing their children as much as they'd like. But it doesn't happen in a vacuum - it's what a grown-up does to get out of a fix, knowing it's time-limited and will allow for the long-term goals (stable household, MORE time with children without being so stressed, etc) to be met.

Originally Posted by jennica

I honestly don't know anything about foreclosure or bankruptcy, other than the people in our lives that we have seen be extremely irresponsible with their money and then file bankruptcy and then get to keep everything they charged up on their credit cards. They don't seem to have any repercussions at all from doing this, except that they have to rent for about five years. I always wanted to save my credit in the past in order to buy a home, but now I don't care if I have to rent. I wasn't aware of any other repercussions, I wasn't trying to make it look like foreclosure was the best option, I just feel like it is and that obviously came out in my post.



No way. Now that is uncalled for. We have never, ever, in our lives payed a rental or mortgage payment late, nor have we payed a credit card late, nor a utility bill unless it was a total accident, which happens to us mortals. I have a long credit history that I can point to. Anyone who wouldn't look at the whole picture is not worth renting from anyway.

I think part of the problem though is exactly that so many people made the same bad choices/mistakes that you did, and so landlords and other lenders are going to be much stricter with who they rent to or loan money to than they might have been in the past. And realistically, I think it's just silly to say someone's "not worth renting from anyway." If you're in a position where you have lots of choices about who to rent from, then sure, that's fine. But the point that was being made is that you likely *won't* have those choices if you foreclose. That's just reality. I don't think it's particularly better for anyone to be all comforting and offering sympathy and hugs while ignoring the very real implications of foreclosing or otherwise walking away from your legal obligations. Sympathy is nice, but it won't help you rent a house down the road, or get a loan if you need one. Pointing out the consequences of certain decisions might allow you to avoid getting in yet another fix. If you had gotten hard advice about the mortgage you were looking into *before* you signed for it, pointing out the large possibility of its being adjusted upward, of the implications of that for a family without a good-sized emergency fund, wouldn't you have wanted that?

Originally Posted by chinaKat

Well, I am sorry for any hurt feelings I have caused by speaking bluntly. The OP did ask for honesty, and that's what I provided, but I should remember that there are real people involved and that sometimes people have no interest in hearing my honest opinions, and that it probably doesn't help anyway.

I speak out of my general frustration with the entire foreclosure fiasco. If this is happening to hundreds of thousands of mortgage holders across the country, I can't see how it's not going to hurt ALL of us. I'm angry with the lenders for allowing this to happen, but I'm also bothered by borrowers that won't take any personal responsibility for getting in over their heads. If people take out an adjustable rate mortgage even though they can't handle an additional $200 in monthly payments, I just can't feel too sorry for them. It's a THIRTY YEAR commitment -- it's hard to imagine anybody thinking interest rates were going to stay so low for that long. Hence my frustration.

I'm sure it's incredibly stressful to personally be in such a bind. I meant no harm to the OP by speaking so bluntly, I was really speaking to the situation in general rather than to the individual at hand, although I'm sure that's not how it came across. I do honestly hope the OP finds a happy way to resolve her situation. I'm just kind of astonished (and really sad) that so many people are in this situation in the first place.

I absolutely agree. There are so many people (in general, and here on this thread) who seem to feel that it's just fine to blame the banks/lenders/brokers for having "pushed" them into a bad loan. That seems really obnoxious to me - no one forces anyone into a loan. And the bank's responsibility is NOT to the borrower, but to its shareholders or owners. Even if someone tries to encourage you to take out a bigger loan than you can reasonably afford, it's always your choice to say no, and even if someone lies to you (and I'm not at all doubting that that happens, although I'm also guessing it doesn't happen quite as often as is suggested by some here), the paperwork spells out the terms - if what you were told doesn't match the paperwork, then you don't sign it. Period. If you have questions, then you get your own attorney to look it over, someone who DOES have a responsibility to you. But if you go ahead and sign a ton of paperwork that obligates you to pay thousands and thousands of dollars over the next few decades, and you do that without understanding what you're signing, then frankly, I think that's something that you've got to expect can come back to bite you in the butt.

Originally Posted by Mothra

I disagree. My commitment to my children is stronger than my commitment to any bank. I would not go to work full-time in a minimum wage job to avoid forclosure.

I know others have already responded to this, so I'll temper some of my first reaction, but ...wow. Just wow. Talk about entitled! There are so many threads on these boards about teaching our children values, and about modeling for them, and what exactly would you be teaching them here? That your desire to stay at home with them outweighs any other commitments you've made? Lovely. Don't MAKE other commitments that might interfere with not working for pay if you feel this way, and then I wouldn't see a problem. But if you accept financial obligations you can't afford, then I think it is absolutely your responsibility to somehow get the money you need to meet those obligations, whether that's getting a job, changing jobs, cutting other expenses, borrowing, or whatever else. I think it's a lot easier to plan for problems (not borrowing more than you can afford even if there's a downturn in the economy, making sure you have a good-sized emergency fund) than to suddenly have to deal with it, but then, I also don't think working outside the home is a bad thing, or means I'm not doing what's best for my children, so what do I know.

Originally Posted by newbymom05

Haven't read the whole thread--please forgive if someone has already posted this. Moody's did a recent survey/study that despite what they say, banks have worked w/ less than 1% of the customers now in default/foreclosure. It's a rigged system and they don't care. This is just like the S&L of the 80's--the banks didn't help the customer then either.

IMHO it is not unethical to walk away, it's unethical to promote an ARM. There is no reason why any bank should push an ARM--it's a device to trick the consumer and take their money. I think Congress should and will step in and make ARMs illegal, or at the very least capped. Just my two cents!

Oh, and FWIW we have a fixed, no debt (other than the mortgage) and I totally think no one should get a free ride! I just think the banking system is at fault here.

ETA I read more and saw the OP's plan--that sounds much better for you! Foreclosure isn't a good thing, although sometimes maybe it's the best option. Good luck in whatever you do.

Again, the bank's responsibility is not to the borrower. Should stores also not sell things to people if it might be bad for them? If you're overweight, should a store be allowed to refuse to sell you anything highly caloric? Who gets to make those decisions, anyway? For some people, an ARM is a great mechanism - should it really be denied to those people because there are others who can't think beyond a few years down the road?

My mom, for example, chose an ARM. She chose it specifically because of the very low initial rate, knowing full well it would balloon within a few years and she would have to refi or pay it off. She then immediately started saving money to pay it off at the time it adjusted. And was able to do so. So she had the advantage of the much lower rate than she could have gotten for a fixed loan, and did what she needed to to ensure that the adjustment wouldn't harm her.

I think it'd be incredibly unfair that due to the irresonsibility of a bunch of other people, people like my mom would have to pay higher rates for fixed mortgages when they're well able to plan for the adjustment that is pretty clearly a part of an *adjustable* rate mortgage.

Originally Posted by jennica

It's easy to say that "the information is out there so you should have found it", but the fact is, I had no idea that there was information that I was supposed to find. When we rented, one of DH's checks went to rent, and the other to everything else. When we bought our townhome, one of Dh's checks went to mortgage and one to everything else. So when we moved here and the mortgage amount came out that one of Dh's checks would go to mortgage and one to everything else, it didn't seem wrong to us or alarming or scary in any way. That is how we had been living life for the 8 years that we were out on our own and it had been going fine. Only recently has that other check of Dh's not been covering all of our other expenses. The crazy thing is that Dh makes more now than ever before (I mean after inflation is accounted for), so I still feel like I have no idea what happened. I still look at the numbers and wonder where I am going wrong and why these aren't adding up anymore.

I'm not saying we didn't make a mistake. We obviously made a very big one. I'm just saying I didn't know any better when we made it. No one told us anything that made us worry about what we were doing. Our realtor, our lender, our parents, our siblings, our friends, none of them said that our mortgage payment had to be only 25% of our take home pay. Everyone we knew was living the same way as we were. We grew up in homes were our parents struggled to make ends meet and spent half of their monthly pay on rent/mortgage too.

So, like I said, I'm glad you've had such great opportunities in life. It sounds like your doing great financially and it also sounds like you are very knowledgable about things that I never even knew that I should know or look for. But, I think there are a lot of people out there like me, and I don't think it is entirely our fault what is happening now.

But I think that's exactly the point - you SHOULD have found the information on what the mortgage was, what it means, what it could adjust to and when, what that would mean in terms of monthly payments. If it's not you, the one signing the forms obligating you to the payments, who should find it, then who should???

I find it a bit ironic that there is such an emphasis on other parts of this board about doing one's own research, not just trusting the professionals (about vaccination, circumcision, education, medical treatments...), and yet here, suddenly it's all the fault of the professionals who didn't provide clear enough information, or who encouraged people to borrow more than they could afford. Of course they do that - that's how they make their money!! It's OUR job to decide what we can afford, not theirs.

For me, when I was first getting pre-approved for a mortgage, I was a bit shocked by how much money the bank said I could borrow. And even my real estate agent was pushing me to look at bigger more expensive houses than I wanted to, showing me how much the bank had approved me for. But you know what - it was MY decision, not theirs. I was the one who'd have to live with the consequences, not them. And I didn't want to have so much of my savings and my future earnings tied up in my house. So I got a much smaller house, for much less money than they were willing to loan me, so I knew I would definitely be able to afford my payments, no matter what. And all around me, at that time and since, I see lots of people buying much bigger fancier homes than I have (not saying this is the case for you, OP - it's more a general observation on the topic), and then facing bankruptcy or foreclosure or both. I have a hard time feeling all that sorry for them, when they made a deliberate choice to live beyond their means.

Originally Posted by ZanZansMommy

:



Ditto!

I love how so many people have the crystal ball of what life may throw them & you have to factor this & you have to factor that. Spare me. You cannot be prepared for any & everything that may come your way. And you can read & read & inform yourself & still get screwed. Depends on where you find the information, who do you believe etc? Not everything is cut & dry. Yes you need personal responsibility & the OP has admitted to that.

We had 3 mortgage brokers lie straight to our faces. Out right LIE. And they both came highly regarded by friends & family who had used them. We could have easily been screwed. They make it look so easy & just blow smoke up your arse.

I am not in your situation OP but I hope you know some of us do realize you looked to someone with the expertise (the mortgage broker/co.) to help you decide if homeownership was something you could afford. They obviously lied to you

If they didn't lie in the paperwork, then you (the OP, ZanZansMommy, and anyone else who feels they were lied to) still had the chance to see what the real terms were, to bring the paperwork to an attorney who was hired just to be responsible to you, and to refuse to sign. If they DID lie in the paperwork, then you have an easy out - that's the whole idea of paperwork - if they're trying to change the terms now from what you signed, the law's on your side.

It's not a question of a crystal ball. It's just recognizing that bad stuff can happen, and being prepared for it. If it doesn't happen, great - you don't need to use your emergency fund or other preparations. But the reality is, stuff happens, and while we may not be able to predict exactly what that stuff will be, you know that something bad can happen. That's why we have insurance - so if the car accident, medical problem, house fire happens, we're able to deal with that. The emergency fund allows us to weather job losses, unexpected expenses, other things needing money. And if you don't have such back up plans, then maybe committing to major long-term financial obligations isn't the best of plans!

Originally Posted by newbymom05

Respectfully, hogwash. It's a choice w/ ramifications, like anything else. If the OP were working, who's to say they wouldn't have qualified for XXX more dollars and faced the same scenario now?

I'm happy to be a SAHM and it ain't the life of luxury and our last name isn't Gates. We cut our coat to fit our cloth just like everyone else--we just currently use less cloth.

Sorry to hijack, Jennica--good luck w/ your short sale.

It's not a luxury exactly, but it is a choice. A great choice, for some people, if it's what they want to do and what they can afford to do. But if you don't have enough money to meet your basic expenses, then it seems to me that the ramifications of that choice are such that it's no longer a reasonble choice.

And if the OP made more money and thus "qualified for xxx more dollars," I would argue exactly as I have above that qualifying for xxx dollars doesn't obligate anyone to actually borrow that much. But if she, or you, believe it does, then I guess it's a good thing she wasn't working for pay at the time of getting the mortgage, or it would be that much more daunting now.

[eggplant]

Originally Posted by MamaWindmill

I think people need to remember that we're talking about a disruptive and upsetting event in a person's life, not just a hypothetical situation or a philosophical argument about the state of the economy and so on - and have a little more kindness for the OP, who I imagine has spent a lot of sleepless nights feeling terrible about this.

OP: I just read your update, among the thousand posts that showed up while I was writing my post. I'm really glad it worked out for you.

(Edited to add: oops. How embarrassing! It wasn't while I was posting - I didn't click on the second page! Sorry about that....)

That said, in response to the above: I think that people ARE being kind in pointing out consequences, and whose responsibility things are. As someone noted above, if someone at the bank told the OP she wouldn't have taxes to pay on the forgiven amount, whether they lied on purpose, or just were mistaken (say, because they read about the proposals to change that law, and just thought the changes had already been passed), will it really matter? The government is not going to accept her saying "but the bank said I wouldn't owe taxes" instead of the actual taxes owed! If the bank person lied but the paperwork she signs has a statement in there along the lines of "any taxes incurred are the responsiblity of the OP" and I'd be shocked if it didn't, just like whenever you go to a dr or hospital you sign forms saying that you acccept responsibility for any charges that insurance doesn't reimburse them for), then it won't really matter if she says that she was told (verbally) that that wouldn't happen. What's on paper, with her signature, is what counts.

If I were in her position, I'd much rather have people pointing out the potentially major consequences of my decisions so I could look into them before signing then just being "kind" and letting me dig myself in deeper.

Originally Posted by Petersmamma

Being a SAHP is ONLY a luxury item if you will be able to make enough to afford dc, extra transportation costs, extra clothing costs, additional taxes, the price of convenience foods (because I WOH and let me tell ya, all these people that say make everything from scratch absolutely DO NOT work a 40+ hour week and if they do they are probably squeaking by with about 4 hours of sleep a night), and all the other hidden costs of working.

FWIW, I work fulltime and still see my kid plenty, make plenty (although yes, not all) meals from scratch, and get more than four hours of sleep. I'm sure there are many here who could say the same.

More on point: there are other long-term benefits to working for pay, even if at the beginning it's a tossup, or even a loss, financially. There are retirement implications. Possibly insurance benefits. The advantage of not having to scramble from scratch if the other wage-earner suddenly can't work. And the fact that over time, the financial benefits get much bigger due to raises and fewer daycare expenses.

Originally Posted by jennica

From this website which was linked above;



The bank told us we had to prove that we would have a zero or negative balance at the end of each month, and then they would be able to do a quick sale, forgive our debt, and we would not owe anything on taxes.

I will check with a tax advisor to be sure. How do I find one and how much will they charge me to ask them this question?

By the way, our realtor did not expect to be able to sell our house in the event of a quick sale, he expected that the bank would take over the sale with their own agents. He has even sent us the form to take the house off the market when the time comes. He had no vested interest in advising us to do a quick sale. He will lose money on the deal since he likely wont get to sell the house.

I think the best way is to start with a google search of credentialed accountants in your area. At http://www.accountantsworld.com/list/directorylist.aspx you can plug in your zip code to get a list of accountants, and you should then be able to get info directly from them about their services and charges.

I do think it's great that you are making sure to hire someone (or at least find someone) who will be responsible solely to you, with no other vested interests, in figuring out this deal. I really think that even if it seems like a cost you can't afford, in the long run it is more than worth it to get correct advice for you. I hope that it all works out as you want it to.

[Emmeline II]

Originally Posted by newbymom05

I think Congress should and will step in and make ARMs illegal, or at the very least capped. Just my two cents!

Didn't Congress start this whole thing by pressuring the banking industry to relax mortgage qualifications because they were unfairly keeping X,Y,Z groups from the American Dream.

[cristeen]

Originally Posted by eggplant

Even if someone tries to encourage you to take out a bigger loan than you can reasonably afford, it's always your choice to say no, and even if someone lies to you (and I'm not at all doubting that that happens, although I'm also guessing it doesn't happen quite as often as is suggested by some here), the paperwork spells out the terms - if what you were told doesn't match the paperwork, then you don't sign it. Period. If you have questions, then you get your own attorney to look it over, someone who DOES have a responsibility to you.

I'm going to assume from your tone that you've never worked in the mortgage industry.

Lying happens by the minute. To the customer, to the client, to the bank. I saw things going on that made me sick. And I got "layed off" twice because I refused to tell those lies. Just because you haven't experienced it doesn't mean it isn't everyday in the industry. Chances are good that you A- did a lot of homework, or B- had a good broker who did what they're supposed to do. You'd be amazed at how few of those there are out there. There's too much money involved in the industry for it to not be corrupt.

And I don't know what the laws are in your state, but not every state has lawyers involved in the process. And in those states, the process of hiring a lawyer to look over the paperwork is generally not feasible, not practical, and definitely not cheap. I know from 10 years in the business that on average we would get loan paperwork within a few days of closing. That doesn't leave time to question anything. If you decline to sign the paperwork because things aren't as they should be, you'd better hope your seller is sympathetic and willing to extend the contract, or else you're out your deposit, your fees, and your new house (and probably your old one, too). The current RE situation makes me very glad that after the last lay off, I decided to get out of the industry.

OP - I'm so glad it worked out for you!

[eggplant]

Originally Posted by cristeen

I'm going to assume from your tone that you've never worked in the mortgage industry.

Lying happens by the minute. To the customer, to the client, to the bank. I saw things going on that made me sick. And I got "layed off" twice because I refused to tell those lies. Just because you haven't experienced it doesn't mean it isn't everyday in the industry. Chances are good that you A- did a lot of homework, or B- had a good broker who did what they're supposed to do. You'd be amazed at how few of those there are out there. There's too much money involved in the industry for it to not be corrupt.

You're right, I've never worked in the mortgage industry. And yes, large sums of money increase the likelihood of corruption. That said, I stand by what I said - I just don't think most people are inherently dishonest or that outright lying is nearly as commonplace as it's being made out to be here. Further, I still think it's a bit irrelevant, because if the lies are not on the paperwork, you have the paperwork to go by, and if they are, you're protected since you have it in writing.

And I don't know what the laws are in your state, but not every state has lawyers involved in the process. And in those states, the process of hiring a lawyer to look over the paperwork is generally not feasible, not practical, and definitely not cheap. I know from 10 years in the business that on average we would get loan paperwork within a few days of closing. That doesn't leave time to question anything. If you decline to sign the paperwork because things aren't as they should be, you'd better hope your seller is sympathetic and willing to extend the contract, or else you're out your deposit, your fees, and your new house (and probably your old one, too). The current RE situation makes me very glad that after the last lay off, I decided to get out of the industry.

Not every state may REQUIRE lawyers be involved in the process, but none of them bar them from being involved. I was not at all required to have a lawyer when I bought my house. I chose to, because I couldn't imagine signing paperwork obligating me for the largest sum of money I've ever been involved with without having a lawyer look over that paperwork for me first, a lawyer who was specifically responsible to ME, and not to anyone else in the process. I didn't get my paperwork much ahead of time at all, but I lined up the lawyer ahead of time to at least be prepared for it. And if things hadn't been as they should have been, then the last thing I'd be worried about is getting my deposit back or the deal going through without the changes! That's my whole point! If the paperwork isn't as it should be, then that's the whole reason I hired the lawyer in the first place, to stop me from signing that paperwork! Why on earth would I want to avoid knowing that???

Me, I'd much rather forfeit a deposit and have to start all over again on househunting than sign paperwork obligating me to huge sums of money in a way I hadn't anticipated (such as not realizing that an ARM would adjust upwards enormously in x years). YMMV.

[Treasuremapper]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...BUQR1442LQ.DTL

I just found this article about help for foreclosures.