concerned

I tried Lending Club and was approved for $22,000 at11.99% with a 672 experian FICO and a short sale/foreclosure on my record, but they charged an origination fee of about $1,100. So I passed. It was a soft pull, but not sure if there would be a hard pull if I agreed to the loan. Then finally caved in and applied to the Discover Personal Loan, because I fell for the no origination fee advertisement. Unfortunately, denied for short sale/foreclosure on report. They also pulled a hard one on ALL 3 REPORTS! Be careful.

That was the Card Act of 2009, instituted in 2010. Wanted to follow up with everyone here on the recent 0.25% rate hikes that many cards have instituted. I thought that when they instituted the Card Act of 2009, one of the main points was that if you were paying interest (lets say 14.99%) and they did a rate hike, it would only apply to new purchases, and the old ones would stay at the 14.99% mentioned in the example. Since interest rates have not been raised till December for most cards due to the prime rate, I had always seen on my Amex that it would list a 'from' and 'to' columns on the interest rate, with only the 08/23/2009 date as 'from' and a blank for 'to'. Now that it went up, my first statement yesterday shows the new interest rate, but it still shows 08/23/2009 date as 'from' and a blank for 'to'. Shouldn't this Card Act have held the old rate of 14.99% for existing balances and only charge 15.24% to new balances? Or I am missing something. Just saw the same thing on my latest Chase statement (raising the interest on all the balance). Thanks, Concerned. No. Account balances with variable rate terms are not protected against rate increases that result from a change in the index rate (e.g. prime rate increase). They are protected from rate increases should the issuer increase the rate margin (say, a move from Pr+9.9% to Pr+13.9%) Perfect. Thanks for the clarification. Tried googling it but probably was not using the correct terms. Thanks.

That was the Card Act of 2009, instituted in 2010. Wanted to follow up with everyone here on the recent 0.25% rate hikes that many cards have instituted. I thought that when they instituted the Card Act of 2009, one of the main points was that if you were paying interest (lets say 14.99%) and they did a rate hike, it would only apply to new purchases, and the old ones would stay at the 14.99% mentioned in the example. Since interest rates have not been raised till December for most cards due to the prime rate, I had always seen on my Amex that it would list a 'from' and 'to' columns on the interest rate, with only the 08/23/2009 date as 'from' and a blank for 'to'. Now that it went up, my first statement yesterday shows the new interest rate, but it still shows 08/23/2009 date as 'from' and a blank for 'to'. Shouldn't this Card Act have held the old rate of 14.99% for existing balances and only charge 15.24% to new balances? Or I am missing something. Just saw the same thing on my latest Chase statement (raising the interest on all the balance). Thanks, Concerned.

This is only my experience but it might work for you. Had a lease with Hyundai, and wanted to purchase the car at the end of the lease. Had 90+ days late on mortgage and heloc, so I only qualified for 20+%. Not having missed any payments on the lease, the dealer was happy to sell me a msrp priced car (3 years newer) but he asked Hyundai Financial to consider the payments on the lease to qualify for a low rate for 6 year promotion. Not the best option, but at least got a great rate - 3.9% and a newer car.

Not sure how it turned out, but as long as you still own the home, the will not settle for less than what they are requesting (50%). About same here, with 100,000 + underwater and 36k from them. Stopped paying in 03/11 and it was charged off 10/11. Then I had to do a short sale with a different arm of their company, and they wanted 30%. Delayed the short sale for 2 1/2 years, and at the end ended up with 6k, which is the max the 1st loan would pay (about 20%). They are very difficult and nasty to deal with. Any threats of bankruptcy did not phase them at all. Hopefully you were able to come out of it clean and forgiven the rest.

Just think about the end process. When the 1099 is filed, it will include the amount in negative escrow and it will count as your income. So I would say you can count it, and it has been filed under your name. Same situation when in a short sale, the interest paid throughout the time there was no payment is reported in the 1099-C, because it technically went to you first (HUD) and then you paid the loan less than the amount owed, but with all the principal and escrow covered first, so then they have a larger principal amount to write off.

Don't forget about the new PMI rules for FHA loans. edited to remove link "FHA borrowers are charged an annual mortgage insurance premium of up to 1.35 percent of the average outstanding balances of their loans. The fee is added to the borrower's monthly mortgage payment. The FHA also charges a 1.75 percent upfront fee when the borrower gets the loan. A borrower getting a $200,000 loan, after making a 3.5 percent down payment, pays $225 per month in FHA mortgage insurance, plus an upfront fee of $3,500. Say you keep that mortgage for 10 years before you sell or refinance -- that adds up to about $30,000 in mortgage insurance fees."

Thanks for the update. Just finished an 80/20 short sale that went for 2.5 years and several different banks: 80: First Horizon --> MetLife --> Nationstar (with Chase listed on the Foreclosure paperwork) 20: First Tennessee --> Green Tree --> Green Tree Collections (Listed as RBS in the foreclosure) Have Metlife shown as late payments, but owe 0 (transfered) Have Nationstar shown as in Foreclosure procedure, late payments (showing full amount) Have Green Tree showing Charge off, the same as the other Green Tree Collections. Same amount for both but different account numbers. Disputed and came back as correct. Looks like a lawyer may help.

Send them a copy of your short sale agreement where the agree to waive the deficiency balance. This applies to any settlement (mortgage, car, etc) Without this, it will be very difficult. Even if they told you and you had seen the agreement to say that, if they made you sign something at the last minute, it could have changed there. Nationstar tried to pull that with me by saying it was an updated agreement only changing the date, only to find out they removed the waiver to go after deficiency balance from the agreement.

It depends how you have to do it. Like the Hyundai one I just finished, you cannot just send in a check and buy it in FL, but you can do that in other states. To buy it in FL, you have to make an appointment with the finance person at the dealership to complete the transaction. That is just one manufacturer. I imagine is different with others. As for buying the same car, that was my idea when I started, and especially at the end, when the value was 12,750 and retail for the same car was abou 16.5k. But sometimes things happen with your credit that you were not expecting, and your credit is not good at the end of the lease, and you might be looking at double digit loan apr. Be on the lookout 3-6 months before the end of the lease for offers like eliminating the return fee (mine was 400) and reduction in more than typical repair fees. That could mean that the car is worth more than the residual value, at least that is what I think it is, unless it's a typical end of lease thing to get you in a new car.

Thank you both for your replies. We had hired a personal injury attorney while he was in the hospital alive. That is where the settlement from the insurance came from. At that time we had no idea he had any kind of insurance and was living on a 1-bedroom rental with very few posessions. When he died were just trying to figure how to fly him back to give him a proper burial next to his parents and how to pay for it. Sounds like the next step would be to have the hospital file with the medical insurance before opening the estate, and let them know that the money from the settlement was used for his burial, and provide all the receipts if needed. Then hire an estate lawyer to open the estate to settle any old outstanding creditors, including ambulances, co-pays and deductibles. As for the estate filing any claims against the party that hit him, FIL was in the wrong and cited for jaywalking, so were are just happy that the funeral costs were covered.

APPROVING BANK: HYUNDAI MOTOR FINANCE BUREAU PULLED: EQUIFAX CREDIT SCORE: 647 CUSTOMER STATE OF RESIDENCE: FL NEW/USED: NEW (Demo) YEAR OF VEHICLE: 2013 MILEAGE: 1151 RETAIL/LEASE: RETAIL AMOUNT OF LOAN $26,682.50 ADVANCE PERCENTAGE 90% TERM CONTRACTED 72 MONTHS APR/LEASE RATE 3.9 APR MONTHLY PAYMENT $416.24 MISCELLANEOUS COMMENTARY: SCORE LOW DUE TO FORECLOSURE IN PROCESS AND CO-SIGNER ON ANOTHER CAR. PROMOTIONAL APR BASED ON SUCCESFULL COMPLETION OF LEASE WITH HYUNDAI MOTOR FINANCE.

Short story: FIL died after being hit by a car, with 60k life insurance to the estate, personal injury settlement and death benefit for for 11k (that paid for funeral), and a hospital lien for 250k, but they have not filed through his medical insurance. The lien sent says it was against the settlement, but we received after the settlement due to mail forwarding. We are trying to do probate, but want them to settle through insurance first, and let the estate pay for any out of pocket costs and deductibles. Is that the right way to go? Or are they going to demand the settlement money used for the funeral before they bill his insurance? If they are going to play hardball, can we just ignore the probate since all the money is going toward the hospital lien, and it will be a long and costly waste of time. Long story and not sure were to go next. In August 2012, FIL was hit as a pedestrian by a car, sent to ICU for 3 weeks, and died 1 day after being released to regular care. Lived by himself, not married. Wife contracted an ambulance chaser who got 10k for personal injury (with 33% cut) and 5k for death benefit. He did not own a car, and the driver had the minimum in insurance required, mid sixties with no job and no assets. Had to fly body to hometown to bury. Got burial arrangements and paid them 2 months later with personal injury and death benefit. Had seen the medical insurance claims come in, about 20k in charges and insurance covered 19.5k with $500 co-pay owed by him (or estate). Lawyer asked if all medical bills were paid, and we told him that his medical insurance was paying based on EOB mailings. After settlement, we received through mail forwarding a hospital lien to his estate for 250k on the personal injury settlement, which was used to pay for his funaeral and the lawyers fee. The hospital has not billed his insurance, but various doctors that treated him already have. He had Accidental Death Insurance through his checking account which we found after about 4 months that would be paid to his estate because there were no designated beneficiaries. It is about 60k. Based on this, his only estate assets, we need to do a probate with no will. Can we just ignore the probate since all the money is going to go toward the hospital lien, and it will be a long and costly waste of time? Or fight the billing first before an estate is created. Ultimately we agree that the estate should pay for his debt, but the hospital should have filled his insurance paperwork first like all the ER doctors did. My guess is that they would get paid less through insurance and are trying to get more money out of the settlement, but it was only 6.7k after lawyer fees. Or do we go ahead and open the probate so that we can file his last tax year, and fight these during probate? Thanks.

Setup the land, and put a trailer now. That will look like 50k in assets to them that you can sell and pay them. If not, they can go after it to settle. But if you are living there once everything goes, you can protect your primary residence.

Nothing. There is no cross reference to stop you at the immigration entrance at the airport, unless it is a large amount and they go ahead and press charges for fraud.