Comments on: Who’s Robbing Who?

By: Gary Frimann

Gary Frimann — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:17:39 +0000

YOu are forgetting one very important point of Morgan Stanley– That being that they owned income property, and probably (I am assuming) had bought with a rather large down payment–hence, they had some skin in the game. They returned the property to their lender, and the lender may or may not be taking a loss. They could be taking a loss on expected earnings, but they may not be (perhaps) taking a hit on any equity lost, as is the case with so many properties where the borrower has chosen to walk away…
This does make a huge difference. The lender in Morgan Stanley (if I recall, it was Barclays) is now collecting the rent. They could be making a good return on that. I have not been able to see the numbers, but Morgan Stanley’s strategic default may not be “harming” the lender.

By: Sean O'Toole

Sean O'Toole — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 04:26:13 +0000

They sold only 3,676 on the courthouse steps to 3rd party investors. That is a completely separate issue from the fact that banks are re-sold almost as many REO’s as they took in. Sorry for not more clearly separating the two.

By: Rob Rittenhouse

Rob Rittenhouse — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 04:09:05 +0000

Sean- Just watched your 11/09 report. I’m confused. You conclude saying banks are selling about all they take in however you report they took back 14,119 and sold only 3676. Shouldn’t they have sold 14000?

Rob

By: Move Your Money - New Year's Resolution - Who's Robbing Who? | California Home Sales Solutions

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 05:02:05 +0000

[...] Sean O’Toole’s article Who’s Robbing Who? to learn more about how the banks are getting out from under their own over leveraged purchases [...]

By: Dave

Dave — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 16:48:12 +0000

Fantastic piece of writing. Excellent job of really showing the disparity and uselessness of the current “solutions”!