>However, in the current environment of low interest loans and high foreclosure rate, the banks seem to be happy to have anyone paying the mortgage. I think that this will continue for some time.

That’s why I said >Well, practically speaking the lender might be thrilled to death to learn somebody paid all the back payments plus their costs of initiating the foreclosure process. What with all the properties they’re having to take back, you’ve no doubt made their day.

Lenders today will be happy to get their payments — but it won’t be long before they’ll be checking behind the scenes, and comparing notes — so to speak.

However, in the current environment of low interest loans and high foreclosure rate, the banks seem to be happy to have anyone paying the mortgage. I think that this will continue for some time.

Using “subject to” to hold for the long term is probably not the best idea but for short term holdings you can’t beat the cost.

To learn more about this subject check out my blog at http://www.shortclosures.com or subscribe to my Free Newsletter at http://www.whoisdickweiss.com

Yours in Success,
Dick Weiss

I’ve known too many who have sold Subject To where the buyer just gave up and said “to hell with it” because it wasn’t their name or credit on the line.

And yes, the banks would rather have a “Subject to” buyer paying the note…well, until it becomes better for them not to. What I mean is that when that loan you saved from foreclosure could now be drawing interest at 7.5% (will interest rates go that high again?) they will call the note. I don’t know where that line is, but it’s there. And make no mistake about it.

Love reading your blog!

And to think that all this time I thought the “due on sale” clause was #17! Thanks for setting the record straight!