Dude bulldozes home instead of foreclosing

[Homeslice]

http://www.wlwt.com/news/22600154/detail.html

My questions are this:
1) Damn, Ohio is cheap.......that's a lot of home for $350K
2) If the IRS put liens on his business, wouldn't that mean that he was behind on his taxes? If so, how is he an angel?
3) Will the Tea Bag Party hire him as a guest speaker?

[Captain Morgan]

Hmm, not sure the bank has the right to tell him he can't pay off his house and keep it, but I don't know all the rules and don't know why they were even allowed to refuse that payment. Maybe someone in bank collections would have that info.

Sounds to me like there is some connection between the IRS lien on his business and the bank foreclosing on his house. Not sure if he got a loan to pay off his brother and also used money that should have gone to pay taxes to help pay the balance, thus resulting in the IRS lien.

We definitely are not getting all of the information in this story, that's the only thing I know for sure.

ETA: and since he bulldozed it, the bank can still foreclose on the land, then charge him the difference in what he owes and what they get out of it. If they choose to write off that difference, the IRS considers that as income to him and he'll have to pay taxes on it. If they don't write it off, they'll sue him for the remainder. Dumbass.

[smileyman]

Banks dont just TAKE collateral, it gets pledged by the borrower, so if he pledge it to back up his commercial then the bank certainly wont allow it to leave for less than what their loss will be. Especially if the IRS gets the lions share of the commercial sale. And Cap'n is correct in assuming that he probably signed personal guarantees and will have to take the loss either way. Dumbass.

[Homeslice]

^ Astute observations

[Kaneman]

I would assume someone who bulldozes their house down plans to go into hiding afterward....so yea, they could TRY to sue him, but its not that easy.

If you can't find someone you can not sue them. Eventually you may be able to "serve by publication", but it won't do you any good to get a lawsuit and no defendant. I went through this many times trying to sue people for $500,000-$1,000,000 cars. *cough* Floyd Mayweather, Bernie Madolf, Farzan Farmani, Julius Irving, and the like *cough*

Its much, much easier than you would think to fuck the bank out of huge sums of money, and difficult to find people without the help of law enforcement...which you usually won't get unless they're already wanted for something else. There is an entire subculture of people who devote themselves to getting away with pulling one over on the banks.

[smileyman]

From my experience it is just not worth chasing some of these guys. I have been a bank collector/portfolio manager for 9 years, was an lender for 10. Most of this crap could be avoided with proper underwriting. Once you get into a tarbaby situation you take what you have to and get shed of it.

I suppose we are all just lucky that this guy didnt own an airplane!

[Racerboy]

Good for him....his choice, no matter what the consequences. I think everyone could have given a little here but since the bank was standing solid on their needs/wants, he did the same.

[karl_1052]

"The average homeowner that can't afford an attorney or can fight as long as we have, they don't stand a chance," he said.

How about you just pay your bills on time instead of your lawyer and not even get into this mess.

dumbass

[derf]

Dude is no angel, he is totally bad ass

[the chi]

I didnt read the article, however i Heard this guy interviewed on the radio yesterday. Very mellow, laid back kinda dude.

His story:

He used his house as cross collateral on a commercial property, business tanked and he fell behind. When the bank decided to foreclose, instead of taking his business property, they took his house instead and refused to allow him to make up the past due payments on the business. Apparently they turned his check away for 10K when he tried.

They also refused to let ANYONE else buy the home. He had someone willing to buy it and basically sell it back to him for the balance of it at auction and the bank president was quoted by someone as stating heck no, I've got the bid in on that house (and it was like 220K or something WELL BELOW what the home is worth).

Since they refused any payments from him, and they were determined to make him homeless (my words, not his) he just took a bulldozer to it. They can have the land he said, but not the house it took him 3.5 years to build himself.

What makes it even more interesting, his commercial property is valued at like 1.5 million, and it would have been more sound if the bank had taken the commercial property and sold it to get their money back, but instead they took his home, that he was not late on and refused the commercial property altogether.

And the whole interview the guy wasnt blaming or angry, just very matter of fact. He did state what he did was not against the law, and so far he hasnt heard a peep out of the bank.