Foreclosure rate rising in Hennepin suburbs

  • Article by: STEVE BRANDT , Star Tribune
  • Updated: July 30, 2008 - 11:35 PM

The shift from Minneapolis to suburban districts comes just as the federal government has increased assistance to cities struggling with foreclosures.

  • 11
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
workingmom84Jul. 30, 0811:19 PM

The Stanton plan to save homes from Foreclosure would save billions of our hard earned tax dollars and keep people in their homes. His plan includes strong loss mitigation, enforcement of FDIC laws and tweaking the bankruptcy laws. Darryl Stanton will get my vote September 9th.

3
22
KarencheyneJul. 31, 08 4:21 AM

There has to be ways to keep people in those homes rather than see so many foreclosures. Even if the those debtors who may have suffered a major job loss could make a reasonable rent-type payment instead of a mortgage payment for a year, the banks wouldn't be out so much money and the house wouldn't be left vacant and subject to vandalism. Those who deliberately walked away because their house has lost value shouldn't be let off the hook. After all, this situation will reverse in time and their houses will regain their value.

10
11
wyoguyJul. 31, 08 9:22 AM

I'm all for keeping people and families in their homes and I agree some kind of government assistance is a good idea. What bothers me is that, if this plan doesn't have appropriate checks and balances, we are using hard earned taxpayer dollars to bail out people that overextended themselves to buy the proverbial "McMansions" that I see all around me in Chanhassen. We make good money, but wew chose to buy a modest house and keep our mortgage payment low. I am fine with helping out those truly in need, but it would chafe me to bail out those that felt a need to be in over-sized, showy mega-homes and now find their fragile fiscal situation can't support their need to maintain "image".

13
5
brienkateJul. 31, 0810:42 AM

I just don't understand people that have jobs and don't pay the mortgages they got themselves into. If you lose your house, where are you going to go? And, why should should other taxpayers have to bail you out? I am in a money crunch along with everyone else but I always pay my mortgage first even though I sometimes have to let other bills slide. There won't be any government bailout for me because I chose to do the right thing. (I didn't go out and buy lots of toys with home equity loans, etc. either!) Now my taxes will have to go to the guy who lived for the moment and didn't think about the future.

21
8
ejkohnkeJul. 31, 0810:37 PM

can stay in the new Twins Stadium, there is money well spent.

10
1
spicebearJul. 31, 0810:55 PM

What if it doesn't reverse itself? What if the combination of fewer people in their "home buying years" (the youngest boomer is 44 this year) combined with lower earnings (gen x & y are not gaining in income like the boomers did)means that home values keep dropping for a while and then only appreciate at the rate of inflation? There are people who count noses who think this is possible.

9
2
lauristonAug. 1, 08 4:44 AM

Higher foreclosure would follow home refinancing trends! Refinancing follows homes with increasing "estimated market value" and owners who though they could afford the mortgage they entered into. Poor dumb homeowners! Why did they buy? Financial sources, mortgage financing institutions coupled with a "mortgage broker on every corner" telling the dumb homeowner to "refi", pull that equity out, pay off yeasterday's debt, invest or spend, spend, spend! Most of us have been there. We bailed ourselves out. Why do we have to bail the financial institutions andinvestors out of their bad decisions?

13
1
lauristonAug. 1, 08 4:51 AM

Congress was just doing its job! Spend, spend, spend! $250,000 a year, you should be able to bail yourself out. My oh my! Thank you Congress! Too bad you do not understand what in - - - - you're doing except buying votes to facilitate your re-election. Please retire, let some with half a brain in to relpace you!

15
0
dthornleyAug. 1, 08 3:00 PM

Spicebear is right, but I still think Karencheyne's suggestion is about as good as I've seen. Otherwise, those houses just sit there getting vanadalized and losing even more value, and the mortgage-holders can't be happy about that. Of couse, people who can afford the $600K mortgage on a home now valued at $400 will want the same deal, and folks who cannot afford even the reasonable rent are abandoned. There is no good answer!

8
0
baluchAug. 2, 08 8:31 AM

I can't wait to swoop in and buy a place this fall when the market is so bottomed out they'll be kissing my feet to buy. Thanks to all of the morons who didn't consult a real estate lawyer when they bought their house, ran out and put their flat screen TV's, computers, video games and Hunter Douglas blinds on credit cards and couldn't keep up with their ARM loans. I love you people. I used to drive by your $300,000 houses in the burbs and knew by the sheets hanging over the windows that you were one credit card payment away from losing it all. You just created hundreds of thousands of opportunities for responsible people to purchase homes at their real values, and after you took all of the depreciation. "Nature weeding out the stupid" is in full effect at the Sheriff's sales.

11
3

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT