Member Since Jun 7th, 2010
Are you Jennifer? If So, Login Here.
Apr 2nd 2013 9:25AM He has no class and was likely an arrogant jerk for 22 years. All he did was show himself for the ill bred bottom feeder he likely is. Nope - this doesn't work for me no matter who puts it on a house.
Feb 10th 2013 1:24PM @I wlive within my means
Banks have been modifying mortgage terms for decades. The only issue now is it's mostly public and an epidemic due to banking practices during the boom. The rest of your post is simply nonsense. When the banks foreclose on these houses, the investors lose money. It's a huge haircut to what they loaned. A modification eliminates that haircut on principle and just lowers the interest received. Every financial entity on the planet exposes themselves to risk when they lend - participating in stupidity is another matter. Chase services this loan but it advises the client and therein is another problem. When loans are modified to what people can really afford, the net result has been the loans become performing and the problem goes away. When banks do bandaid measures (not really reducing anything or doing anything significant) then it's a disaster. Did you know that every month Chase has to fool with this they get an additional payment from the true investor? This is a money maker for Chase. They do this to everyone due to the profit margin. Learn before you type.
Aug 14th 2012 6:51AM Very cold looking house, austere in fact. The pool and the view are fabulous but the house has no warmth. I wouldn't pay a mill much less 38.
Jul 8th 2012 11:52AM It sounds discrimminatory on it's face. A kid's birthday party can have as many as 40 people in attendance. I bet they aren't required to apply for anything or do anything special in the event of a fire. How about a family cookout? A Nascar group? Or even one of those neighbors having a Longaberger, Pampered Chef, or Avon party?
It is what it is. Discrimmination. The neighbors are also complicit. I am not big into religion but when they come down on one person like that over something that's legal? They need to show me where they shut down kiddie birthday parties due to the numbers in attendance and then show me where they charge the owner with running a party business because they have more than one kid and have those parties regularly through the year.
Mar 29th 2012 4:52PM She got a copy of the docs before she settled on that condo. She knew up front items on the door frame weren't allowed. Another instance of someone figuring the rules won't apply to them when they complain or raise legal issues. You get a copy of the docs? Sign you understand them? Then you gave up the right to whatever you signed away. It's that simple. She could buy elsewhere. Oh, and it's possible to sign off your religious freedoms. You just sign! It's not a requirement that you have a religion, just freedom of it - unless you sign that away.
Feb 25th 2012 3:08PM I think BOA is swirling the drain. This too big to fall is nonsense. I think they will be the next to fall. They said Lehman Brothers was too big - surprise! Countrywide, etc. If they would fall - BOA, Citi - and the mortgage markets were back in the hands of smaller local banks - this would clear up PDQ.
Fannie is requiring them to buy back crap loans and BOA doesn't want to. They would rather sell them to lesser informed investors in packages and pools so they can get these crap loans off their books.
Swirl BOA swirl......
Jan 8th 2012 3:21PM That's you. And you get to live the way you choose. The people in this age restricted community are not being allowed to live the way they choose and for what they paid for.
Look, not everyone has had or even likes children. Many have had them and are now ready to live somewhere that they don't have to encounter child things daily. Age restricted communities are very minimal and they have the absolute right to not have permanent children living there.
Just because you aren't all about kids doesn't mean you shouldn't have freedom of choice of where and how you live.
Jan 8th 2012 3:18PM I dont feel their misfortune should be visited on anyone elsse. They bought in that neighborhood knowing the rules. I suspect they also knew their daughter was a handful before they moved there. The problem is there own and all their own. They need to rent the house out to a qualified senior and rent somewhere until the child is 18 or not in their custody.
I have family in age restricted communities and don't feel they should be punished for the choices of the families of the others in the community.
Jan 8th 2012 3:14PM Who can live in an age restricted community is regulated by Federal Law. A disabled/handicapped adult can live in these communities without children. Handicapped/Disabled typically have the mobility of the 62+ adults in these neighborhoods and it works out.
I wish people would research this before they post, along with the author. This isn't an arbitrary HOA rule. This is a restriction for the building permits for the age restricted community which must adhere to federal law. If I lived in their neighborhood I would sue them. If the age restriction is lost, then taxes, etc., can go up causing hardship for the other property owners. They need to stop being selfish, rent out the house, and rent another one in a neighborhood where they don't create havock.
Jan 8th 2012 3:11PM Age restricted communities are a legal construct that require conformity to laws that regulate who can live in them. The HOA is the entity that enforces that and is required by law.
Don't confuse living in Happy Acres with an HOA with living in Retirement Acres with an HOA.
Most Popular Stories
No features currently available.