If purely a business i.e. financial decision . . .
Logical would be to first see if there's any opportunity to renegotiate the loan principal, using some of the govt programs. Because the ideal would be to get less upside down while not ruining the credit record, not paying transaction costs (points etc) again, and avoiding risk of some punitive retroactive measures (suppose credit bureaus later start keeping foreclosure on score for 15 years?) as well as potential harm to employability etc.
If that is impossible, then I think the numbers favor walking away. Don't have calculator handy, would have to look at scenarios and see which net out better.
Quote:
Quote de jyl
Answer depends on whether view buying a house as a business decision or as a moral commitment. It is not both.
Stricley looking at this as a business decision on a non-recourse loan. The question has made for an Interesting social experiment. Not one lucide well thought out logical argument with facts and figures supporting either option. Plenty of emtional fodder though.
The reason I posted this question is because I'm in the financial fiedl and I am getting this question asked of me more and more. I know the answer I usually tell the client. I just wanted to run a hypo through Pelican to see what others might tell someone.
The:
I discounted the example another 16% to get the starting value ($250k)back to 2.7x income.(the histocial average of median family home values to income...according to Case-Schiller) Then assumed the historical CA. growth rate.
|