Cross posted from Discuit

    • boonhet@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      It makes sense if they were behind on their mortgage and would be forced to sell immediately or something

      Normally most people would try to keep their home by looking for a new job. Not sure how it works in the US, but in my country it would also be fairly common to have mortgage insurance specifically in case you’re laid off, fired, or suffer an injury that causes you to be out of commission for long. I suspect it’s less common in the US if it’s even a thing. Is it a thing?

      • ThePantser@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        They do if they have no savings and the payments are more than any income they are getting. It’s better to quickly sell before the fees start for non payment. There are also options to put your home on forbearance while it’s on the market so the homeowner could have done that immediately to prevent the house being repossessed.

      • Tuukka R@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        When you see moving to a smaller house is inevitable, it might not be worth it to delay for some additional months. Better preserve the savings so they last longer. When your economy goes south, better start more economical life right away.

          • Tuukka R@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            If you have a reason to believe you might be living off your savings for the next two years, you will want to maximize your savings. If you have paid enough of your house to buy the smaller and more remote one with cash, then that’s what you should do.