PredatoryBorrower wrote on September 01, 2007 06:13 PM: Laws to protect Borrowers from themselves and also prevent predatory borrowing?

Ray wrote on September 01, 2007 09:56 AM: This story fails to identify the unclear wording and how or why otherwise qualified borrowers could be affected. I have an adjustable rate mortgage with a payment that has steadily climbed over the past three years. I am current on the payments. I have excellent credit. Because of a prepayment penalty I could not refinance until now. WHAT EXACTLY IS IN THIS LAW THAT COULD PREVENT ME FROM LOWERING MY HOUSE PAYMENT? Benvin is delusional if she thinks a regulation can cure a defect in the law!

douglas wrote on September 01, 2007 08:17 AM: governmental meddling at this point may be too late. restricting what should be a market driven business won't help those who by their own hand, have painted themselves into a corner.

does anyone doubt that many [most ?] of the "subprime" borrowers may not have qualified for conventional loans and their requirements ?

same as the spread of payday loans, home mortgages with interest only, no/low "doc", or escalating interest clauses, such loans are the responsibility of the borrower, not the responsibility of the lender. in any way blaming lenders is dishonest. the spin has already begun by terming lenders as "predatory".

perhaps the legislators now feel some need to directly control mortgage rates or borrower eligibility.

where else but nevada should such a "betting on the come" result appear ?

this default issue may extend to the new car industry as well. as a retired, franchised new car dealer, i'm astounded by local ads for customers who are "$10,000 upside down in their present cars". that negative equity won't disapper or be forgiven, just melded into some new loan, digging the hole deeper.

bottom line is that if one can't afford something, do without. it must not be the other taxprayers' burden to bail out via some government controls, those speculators now in default. no more than other players on a dice game should recompense a losing shooter.

john boyer wrote on September 01, 2007 06:32 AM: You cannot legislate away greed, stupidity or neglect. Financial losses will continue for both lenders and borrowers as long as people engage in lending. From everythin I have seen, common sense would have prevented losses in the mortgage business.

John W. Boyer wrote on September 01, 2007 06:18 AM: As an attorney and "hard money" lender, I get very concerned when the state gets involved in private lending. From my forty years of experience in lending I can tell you the State of Nevada has done little to effectively protect either lenders or borrowers in the loan field. Losses by lenders have come almost universally through greed, neglect or outright ignorance and stupidity while state regulators were on watch. During my entire lending career I have not ever taken a borrowers property in foreclosure or lost any principal. Ironically the only interest I lost was due to the meddling of the state in the Harley Harmon fiasco. The current set of laws have only served to give the parties involved a false sense of protection in the areas of disclosure documents and audits of mortgage brokers. When a true crisis of fiduciary responsibility does happen, it is just too late for the state to help. Lenders and borrowers must resort to immidiate litigation to salvage lost funds.

In any finanicial transaction there has always been risks and rewards on both sides. I have never been of the considered and informed opionion that any law or regulation can eliminate attendant such risk. People who think government can protect them are just deluding themselves into danger.