Cops Break Down Door To Foreclosure Protest House, Carry Away Homeowner

The cops in Wood County, Ohio have broken down the door to the foreclosure protest house and arrested the homeowner and several protesters who had spent the week barricaded inside. As you can see here, the homeowner was literally carried off the property by the authorities.

According to the Toledo Blade the homeowner had fallen behind on payments after being laid off. The house was foreclosed and bought by the bank at a sheriff’s action for $33,333, according to court records obtained by the Blade.

Mr. Sadler, who mostly has worked in factories, said he made his mortgage payments for 12 years after buying the house from his father but fell behind last year after he was off work from Dana Corp. for medical reasons.

The defense league involved in the protests with Mr. Sadler wants to see a moratorium on foreclosures and evictions.

7 people arrested after foreclosure protest at Stony Ridge home [Toledo Blade] (Thanks, Phil A.!)


Edit Your Comment

  1. Browncoat says:


    • wolf3345us says:

      Karma is a bitch

      • Browncoat says:

        Look, i have sympathy for the man, but the law is the law. The Bank legally owned the house. How would you like it if someone was in your house and refused to leave? Most people would call the police to take them out, by force if necessary.

        • Chaosium says:

          A bank is not a person, regardless of what Citizens United Not Timid states, and there’s no need to be smug and gloating about this.

          • SlimDan22 says:

            i wish the supreme court thought that way too about banks and other corporations in relation to free speech and donations to politicians

          • Browncoat says:

            Actually, based upon a number of Supreme Court cases, a corporation has basically the same rights as a natural person to free speech (which is why the campaign finance restrictions were unconstitutional).

        • r01984 says:

          I hope one of those asshole police officers have their house forclosed so they can feel the pain they caused this guy.

          It is BS that the bank would not work with the homeowner.

    • craptastico says:

      i love how in the original article last week the guy says something like “I’m doing this to screw the bank b/c they’re only in it for the money”. well how about that, a bank that’s in it for the money. what does this guy think banks are supposed to do?

  2. ModerateOne says:

    Wow for only $33,000. The banks got bailouts, why can’t this guy?

    • Doubts42 says:

      Because, as your mother SHOULD have taught you, 2 wrongs don’t make a right.

      • Poisson Process says:

        I see ModerateOne’s point. I’m not sure the rest of you do. Right or wrong, like it or not, the tax payers did the banks a huge favor. We bailed them out so they could keep making billions. Maybe they should return the favor and cut this guy some slack until he gets another job. His pre-illness record looks squeaky clean. The house represents like .00000001% of the banks bottom line. The good will gesture would be more than worth it.

        • JennQPublic says:

          This. As a taxpayer, this guy helped bail the bank out. While I think the protest-squatting is immature, why should large corporations get special consideration, while actual human beings are being forced into homelessness?

        • AngryK9 says:

          Taxpayers didn’t do it, the FedGov did it…with taxpayer money. That is a completely different thing. If you shoot your wife with my gun, you are still the one that shot her, even though it was my gun. See what I’m saying?

      • Geekybiker says:

        Yes, but three lefts do!

    • Hoss says:

      That’s the same hick-town talk radio logic that resulted in him being dumped out with the morning trash.

    • Traveshamockery says:

      If you’re against bailouts, you’re against bailouts. Two wrongs don’t make a right. My tax dollars should not be used to subsidize someone else’s mortgage.

  3. sunthas says:

    If he would have filed for bankruptcy he could have kept his house… at least in the short term. And if the reason he couldn’t pay his house payment was past medical bills, then he is paying the wrong bills. Always pay your house and car payments first, they are secured loans, medical bills and credit card bills are unsecured so they can’t take your house from you if you don’t pay those.

  4. dg says:

    Hey – you signed an agreement to borrow $x for a certain period of time and that you’d pay it back. You put up the house as collateral for that loan. You said that if you didn’t pay, that the bank could take the house.

    You lost your job. You’re not making the payments as agreed. Get out.

    It’s literally *THAT* simple. It sucks, but this wasn’t some exotic mortgage – it was plain and simple. Regardless of how long you’ve been there – you owe money, they want it. You don’t pay, they take the collateral.

    You don’t need to be an attorney to understand that. You do need to be a moron to believe that you don’t pay, so you get to stay because ‘times are tough and things suck’.

    Turn off the internet, turn off the cable, cancel the cell phone. Go with the ABSOLUTE basics – get some other people in the house making money. Stop being a whiney fool, get out and make some cash and pay your damn bills. Can’t pay them? Move to someplace you CAN afford. No where? Go live on the street.

    • thompson says:


    • Admiral_John says:

      Exactly right. I watched this drama unfold over the past couple of days and followed their video stream and learned a couple of things:

      1) The homeowner (Keith) is still on disability and not able to work.
      2) He hasn’t made payments on either mortgage for a year.

      He attempted to get a loan modification but was told his debt-to-ration was too high. Which makes sense, since he was on disability, which was 1/2 of his income.

      So honestly, why should the bank give him a modification? He’s not able to make the payments with his current income and he did take on a mortgage agreeing to make the payments. So they took the house back… it’s crap for the homeowner but the bank is well within its rights to do this.

      • AustinTXProgrammer says:

        Agreed. As soon as it become apparent that you can’t afford your home you have to put it on the market and move to something you can afford. If he has been in the home for 12 years there should be enough equity to move, unless he spent it all with equity loans.

        • craptastico says:

          that’s what i don’t understand. they’re definitely leaving a lot out of the equation. if he bought the house 12 years ago, at 12 years ago prices, he should have plenty of equity, even after the crash unless he cashed out his equity big time. how is that the bank’s fault?

      • common_sense84 says:

        “He attempted to get a loan modification but was told his debt-to-ration was too high. Which makes sense, since he was on disability, which was 1/2 of his income.”

        That is a pretty meaningless statement. If a loan modification lowered the payment to a level he could pay with his disability, then it makes perfect sense to do loan modification. Of course the bank finds it more profitable to foreclose and resell than it is to modify, so they will never approve modifications.

        • bhr says:

          There is only so far that they can cut his payment before they won’t see any point. If he was paying $1000 on a $3000/month take home pay with $600 of other bills, to meet the same ratio with a $1500/month take home his payment would have to drop to $150.

          One of my neighbors has been bragging they just got a modification for a 40 year loan at a 4% rate, after not paying for six months while still buying a luxury car and other optional things. That drives me nuts that they are profiting from irresponsibility while I bought a house well under my price limit so I could put money in the bank, bought a used car and have managed to cut expenses so I can keep up payments while I am unemployed.

    • Sitbacknwatch says:

      just like us as taxpayers “agreed” to bail out these banks only to have them use our tax dollars to buy our homes out from under us.. Sounds like nonsense to me..

    • Darkrose says:

      Gee, let’s hope that you never get laid off because of crappy economic conditions.

      • dg says:

        Been there – as soon as I *thought* I might be getting laid off, I started the job search. When the whole division got the axe, I already had irons in the fire and picked up a position. The next time that happened, I decided that I’d had enough of the uncertainty, so I started my own business.

        A recession or two ago – there wasn’t much business – so I got out and started WORKING for anyone who would pay me something. I held three jobs – my business, a big box retail store, and working for a general contractor doing gopher/grunt/rough carpentry. I did what I had to in order to make money to pay the bills so I could stay in the house.

        I cut back on everything that wasn’t essential. I survived and came out stronger for it. Moreover, I made so many contacts in the extra jobs I held, that it BENEFITED my business. It wasn’t easy. It never is. But you do what you gotta do to meet your obligations.

        You don’t go whining about it. It’s not the bank’s fault – it might not even be his. But HE likely had the opportunity to pay for insurance to cover just this kind of issue – if he didn’t have the insurance then oh well.

        Why should WE pay for HIS problems? If you can’t afford something, you don’t buy it. I’d like a Bentley, but I don’t have $500K. How about I go to the dealership, climb in, then refuse to leave when I tell them I can’t pay? What’s the difference? There is none.

        • TardCore says:

          Agree 100%, but this is America! It’s always somebody else’s fault! Does this guy think he’s special or something? There are literally millions of others in the same situation. He got to live rent free for months he could have at least been a man and left whent he cops showed up.

        • craptastico says:

          wait a minute here. are you telling me you lost your job and DIDNT keep your cell phone and internet for the next few years? how did you live? don’t you know you’re entitled to those things whether you can afford them or not?

    • spamme says:

      Have some compassion, man. (start the flame war in 3…2…1…)

      • common_sense84 says:

        The only party that deserves compassion is the bank who was being ripped off by this guy.

        People don’t deserve compassion for trying to live in a house without paying for it.

    • Nick says:

      Living on the street – that’s the American way!

    • misslisa says:

      Amen. I have been in this position twice (until I wised up and left the semincoductor industry, ha!). The first time I got laid off, I was on the phone w/a realtor listing my home for sale before I even made it home from my last day on the job. The second time, I had only lived in my house 9 mos. & didn’t have enough equity to sell, so I found another job posthaste. I had to accept a pay cut, so I also cut out cable, dining out, gym membership, etc. to offset the income loss. You do what you have to do to make it in life.

      • erratapage says:

        Including bankruptcy and protest. I’m glad it worked so well for you, but I’m guessing that most of the current foreclosures are not simple drop cable and latte cases.

      • LostTurntable says:

        You from Toledo? I am. There are no jobs there. How’s he supposed to “move somewhere he can afford” if he’s stuck with a house that he can no way sell?

        Shove it.

        • dg says:

          If he can’t afford it, and he can’t sell it – do what lots of other people have done – STRATEGIC DEFAULT. Walk away. You’re going to get foreclosed on anyway – might as well do it clean.

          • kujospam says:

            You can’t walk away. He still owes all the money from the mortgage. Only in Cali and a few other states, can you actually walk away.

    • mac-phisto says:

      the b.s. part about this (imo) is that up until the passage of the bankruptcy reform act, this individual had another option: he could declare bankruptcy & a bankruptcy judge would often work out a “cram-down”.

      this is no longer allowed on a borrower’s primary residences, so borrowers are beholden to the whims of their mortgage company if they want to stay in their home. i don’t know how long you’ve been following these stories, but a recurring theme is that banks are doing a pretty good job of denying mods for virtually any reason.

      under the old system, this individual probably would have been able to keep his home thru bankruptcy, the bank would still be getting paid (though at a smaller interest rate & possibly over a longer period of time) & they probably would’ve collected more than $33k over the life of the loan.

      why is it assumed that what transpired is a better option than that?

      • varro says:

        Unfortunately, you cannot cram down mortgages in Chapter 13 bankruptcy. You *can* cram down car loans if you bought the car more than 2.5 years before the bankruptcy filing, and you can lower the interest rate on a car loan to prime + 2 (currently 5.25%).

        You can also remove second or third mortgages that are totally unsecured (say, if your property lost value) in a Chapter 13, but you have to complete the Chapter 13 plan and get a discharge to get those debts discharged.

        (Bankruptcy attorney, but not your bankruptcy attorney. Consult a local bankruptcy attorney for information about your situation.)

  5. odarkshineo says:

    dg it must be nice to be that oblivious to the economic crisis that is actually going on…

    There are a complete lack of jobs for hands on

    “According to the Toledo Blade the homeowner had fallen behind on payments after being laid off.”
    “Mr. Sadler, who mostly has worked in factories, said he made his mortgage paym…”

    The banks were given millions of dollars to prevent this type of issue. I seriously doubt this guy worked in a factory for 12 years, and then woke up one day and decided since he was laid off he never wanted to work again. Not someone that had to be carried off of their property. Get off of your high horse and look around at what’s really happening…

    • dg says:

      Nope, I’m not oblivious to it. I see it going on, I’ve experienced it. I’ve cut back on my expenses due to the uncertainty. As to the “complete lack of jobs” – uh huh, I understand that – but you don’t HAVE to work for anyone. Go start your own business – I did. Over the course of my life, I’ve owned/operated many successful businesses. It’s actually harder than working for someone, but much more rewarding.

      If this guy had any skills – he needed to get out and start pitching himself to potential employers. He needed to figure out what he was good at, and start putting up little ads where he could to get business. But no, he “worked in a factory for 12 years” – probably as an over-paid union member who got paid a ton of $$$ and benefits to turn a screw – so when the factory went out of business because their costs were too high, he was suddenly left in the sunlight blinking and going “huh?”…

      Yeah, he’s on disability – I sympathize with him for that. But this guy has a BUNCH of people in the house – he’s not totally in a deathbead – he’s boarded himself into a house w/no ready access to Doctors, etc – so in my eyes he’s not THAT sick.

      And the other fools in the house with him? They’re not on disability right? IF each of them gets out and does SOMETHING to make some money, they could all live OK – maybe not in the lap of luxury, but still there at the house. It’d take a concerted effort at doing something other than blaming everyone else for their own problem.

      And if you were in someplace like Detroit – where there’s NOTHING – then you have to MOVE. Just pack up your stuff and walk away. Go find somewhere else to live. With 6 people in the mix, something could happen.

      For those of you still thinking I’m a heartless schmuck – consider this – he bought a building and started this “Foreclosure Defense league” – where he’d get the money for that? And if he organized this thing – he couldn’t get some *donations* or fees or whatever to help with the fight? The whole thing stinks like a scam…

      More power to the bank for telling him to pay up or get out.

  6. Nick1693 says:

    Banks: You will make more money from a loyal customer trying to pay back their loan after losing their job than you will from auctioning a house to the highest bidder.

    The long term success comes before the short term goal.

    • Mecharine says:

      Thats pretty much not right. Banks will often get more money from foreclosure than if the payments continue. The reason is that they’ll get more money upfront, to add to their revenue , which can then be used to buy up more property.

      More money now, means more money later, in essence. Where as getting payments in piecemeal will reduce the investment power of the bank.

      • axxx says:

        Right. Not to mention the deterrant aspect of all of this. If word gets out that a bank will let you linger on for a year or two without paying how many more takers would there be? This guy didn’t INTEND to lose his home, and he probably would have paid if he could have. But he failed to act – it should have been obvious to him that he couldn’t pay. If he couldn’t get a modification and couldn’t pay he should have sold ASAP. Not put his head in the sand and cry victim.

  7. Sheogorath says:

    As I recall fro the first article on this one, the issue isn’t so much that the guy fell behind, as that the bank pounced on him IMMEDIATELY when he couldn’t pay, despite promises to ‘work with him’. The thing is, he had been paying for 12 years, as stated above, on something like a 58,000 dollar mortgage.

    So basically, it REALLY looks like the bank’s kicking him out of his house so they can sell it for even more money.

    • Admiral_John says:

      The bank initiated foreclosure procedures after he missed four months of payments. That doesn’t sound like “immediately” to me.

    • wrjohnston91283 says:

      I’m pretty sure that the bank doesn’t get to keep the difference between what is owed and what they get, but I may be wrong.

  8. Poisson Process says:

    Already, people are blaming this guy because he knowing signed a home loan. Sure, he bears some responsibility. But, who is at fault for the illness that cost him his job? Most likely no one. Give this guy a break. Why bother foreclosing on this guys house, anyway? Its not like people are lining up to by houses in this economy.

    • Hoss says:

      Your money at any financial institution has been loaned to dozens of guys like this. If you don’t mind if your bank closes at 5pm on a Friday and never opens again, sure your logic is fine

      • Poisson Process says:

        Can anyone think of something other than profit, for like, a second?

        • jebarringer says:

          You don’t really understand business, do you?

        • syzygy says:

          It’s not about profit, it’s about debt. This guy borrowed money, and the bank is entitled to recover it from him. He had plenty of time to figure out what to do about his outstanding obligations once his income dried up, but he decided instead to illegally squat on property that was no longer his. Buh-bye, deadbeat.

    • 1kamaz says:

      The guy did not legally own the house – the bank did. Imagine yourself as a landlord. You rent a room/apartment/house to someone who after perhaps a long period of making steady payments stops paying you. You’d want that person out as soon as possible, wouldn’t you? I have sympathy for the guy, as I’m sure do most other people, but action by the bank was inevitable.

    • says:

      Signing the home loan alone is not really the bad thing, to not be planning for a time of unemployment / sickness though is.

      How long / much do you think the tax payer should pay someone else’s mortgage (or for that matter, how long should a bank not be getting paid) just because someone got sick?

      What about car repossessions or other things? If you enter a contract you have to fulfil it, if you can’t then you are going to be penalized.

      As much as it sucks for him, I find the idea to “suspend foreclosures” cute but unrealistic. What’s next? Free Houses for all? Can I “buy” a house that I know I can’t afford and then tell the bank to not foreclose on me because…. Well, just because?

    • The Porkchop Express says:

      You’re right, his illness is nobody’s fault…not the bank’s at least. his illness really has nothing to do with the bank still having a contract with him that states that he is going to pay them.

      I feel for the guy, but I think the bank may also have rights (eventhough they have abused and missused them to date) in this case. Well, one right…the right to the house that they bought and he was paying them back for until four months before this all started.

  9. ExtraCelestial says:

    This article needs more bias. I’m not sure how I’m supposed to feel?

  10. DanGarion says:

    If he’s been foreclosed upon wouldn’t be not be a homeowner?

  11. puddintank says:

    Here’s a link to a video of the cops bustin in on them.

    • Hoss says:

      The plan to chain themselves together failed Too slow gang

    • dg says:

      What the hell did they spray paint on the wall? They busted holes in the wall, rammed pipes through to put their arms into (which they screwed up), and put about 50 boards over the front door… These people are nuts…

  12. dolemite says:

    Come on sir, it’s off to debtors prison for you!

  13. Doubts42 says:

    “but fell behind last year after he was off work from Dana Corp. for medical reasons. “

    He was healthy enough to board up the house and live inside without access to doctors, medical supplies, etc. he was probably healthy enough to take a job somewhere and pay the mortgage. Instead he spent his time and energy trying to keep the house without paying for it. No sympathy here.

    • guroth says:

      There are plenty of conditions that can prevent you from working that that would allow him to board up his house and sit inside.

      Narcolepsy for one, I’m sure you can crawl webmd if you want a few hundred others.

  14. bsh0544 says:

    I was pretty neutral on this article until I saw this little gem:

    “The defense league involved in the protests with Mr. Sadler wants to see a moratorium on foreclosures and evictions.”

    Way to go from being a possibly-useful organization to a bunch of filthy hippies in one sentence.

    • madanthony says:

      I suspect a moratorium on foreclosures and evictions would lead to a moratorium on people making their mortgage payments and rent payments.

    • howie_in_az says:

      I’d like to see a moratorium on people not paying their bills.

  15. kataisa says:

    We’ll be seeing a lot more stories like this. There was a story on Yahoo the other day about how the recession is hurting middle-aged males more so than other groups. The manufacturing jobs have gone to China and India and they’re not coming back. The mostly middle-aged men who held these jobs are now unemployed, and in this current job market they find themselves unemployable.

    Idle, unemployed men are a danger to society. Our communities will bear the brunt of these frustrated men in the form of drunk driving, domestic violence, family murders, and suicides.

    Why nobody takes the problem of unemployed men seriously is a mystery.

    • SagarikaLumos says:

      Have you ever seen Gran Torino?

    • evnmorlo says:

      The solution is pretty simple. A new government stimulus program paying middle-aged men to dig ditches. You say “broken-window fallacy,” but I haven’t finished! As the middle aged men reach a depth of 20 feet, younger men are paid to fill in the ditches. This process can be sustained until the economy is stronger.

  16. MercuryPDX says:

    Darn I missed it!

  17. Cant_stop_the_rock says:

    When you called this guy the “homeowner” I think you meant “squatter.” It’s an easy typo to make, the keys are like right next to each other.

  18. common_sense84 says:

    Wow, he didn’t even lose his job. He quit over medical reasons. If you chose to quit your job, you cannot cry when they foreclose on the home you needed the job to pay for.

  19. SagarikaLumos says:

    It sounds as if they hauled off the FORMER homeowner, as they should.

  20. lawgirl502 says:

    Thanks Obama, you really helped out. When you bailed everyone out and made conditions of helping out the people in foreclosure, they really listened. (insert sarcastic tone)

  21. thisistobehelpful says:

    Well technically he wasno longer the homeowner…

  22. p2kmon says:

    Last year, State Bank and Trust Co. of Defiance foreclosed on the house, then bought it at a sheriff’s sale in March for $33,333, court records show. Mr. Sadler was supposed to be out of the house by midnight Monday but said he would not leave his home voluntarily.

    So they Foreclosed on the Home and then bought it back for 33,333. Nobody seems to mention this. They took the dude’s money for 12 Years, and then he has trouble, they go and sell the home to themselves. WoW what a great gig, I want that job.

  23. Traveshamockery says:

    “Homeowner” would not be an accurate designator. Maybe “man who hadn’t fully paid off his mortgage and was under the mistaken belief that he’s a homeowner” would be better.

    /sucks at writing headlines

  24. AnonymousCoward says:

    The story is very confusing. The guy leaves his job for some medical reason, though he’s fit enough to get a census job. We don’t know if he had a reasonable fixed rate mortgage that he’s 12 years into paying off, or if at some point he refinanced with some crappy subprime mortgage and is now underwater. Since he never tried to sell the house, and his debt to income ratio is apparently high, I’m taking a wild guess that he refinanced at some point, cashed in his equity, and is now underwater. Not surprisingly, being underwater, and being in Toledo are a bad combination.

    I feel bad for the guy, but mortgage mods were only ever intended to work for people who are still capable of making payments on the house at its current, reduced value. Unfortunate as it is, the system isn’t really set up to help people who get up to their necks in debt, then can’t work for some reason.

  25. duxup says:

    I’m not one to side with the banks often if ever but dude no longer owned the home… That is what happens.

  26. erratapage says:

    Y’all know that it will be more expensive for us to house him when his social security/section 8 benefits kick in, right? I’m sorry, but if we can’t get a little perspective on things, we’re going to end up right back where we just were.

  27. SlimDan22 says:

    My neighbor on my street live in his house for 21 years, he worked at GM as a plant manager, he got laid off but couldn’t find any work because he never got a college educations because he worked his way up in GM. I don’t know how long he stopped making payments but i guess his wifes income was not enough to make the minimum payment and the bank would not work with them. His house got foreclosed on last October. I don’t know why they didn’t want to file for bankruptcy or anything but i didn’t get to talk to him much about it.

    He originally went through a local bank in Michigan Standard Federal, then it was bought by Lasalle Bank, which is now owned and then converted to Bank of America.

    its a shame when you are pay your mortgage religiously for 21 years then end up having the bank bite you in the ass during the 4% (1 year) of your time owning the home.

    Overall, you have to feel some sympathy for some cases, unless you know someone personally that this has happened to then you really dont know how it feels.

    I feel for the OP, it seems like he lived within his means and then had some financial trouble like everyone has.

    If you don’t live in Michigan or Ohio then you don’t understand how the extent of foreclosures are here due to the industrial and automotive businesses laying off people or closing there doors.

  28. What The Geek says:

    So the next time BofA forcloses on the wrong house, we can assume the cops will break down the door and drag them out so the rightful homeowner can move back in, right?

  29. Tombo says:

    Do the cops realize how ridiculous they look in full swat gear, weapons drawn, to evict a medical case from a foreclosure? Bravery, undeniable for those fellas.

  30. smo0 says:

    I think at some point, if you’ve made all of those on time payments and are at least 75% paid through your mortgage, you should be given a little slack.
    I’ve only been following this through via so I have no idea if the “this guy should cut back on cable/cellphone/internet” really applies outside of the “live streaming.”
    Being a child of the Internet, was it really HIS internet he was using? Food for thought there.

    Otherwise… it’s good that this went down. Maybe this will be evaluated and the entire system can get an overhaul. One of the comments mentioned a neighbor who got a modifcation and he’s out buying luxury items? If he’s one of those guys who’s had this mortgage for less than 5 years, eff him. People like that should be written off. The ones who’ve put in a decade or more into their mortgage are the ones who should be able to benefit from these modifications and given special considerations based on the length of time in the mortgage, payment history, etc.
    These aren’t yuppies we’re talking about. It’s the blue collar, middle aged, production environment workers who are getting the boot. That was an America that is no more… we seem to be stripping them of their dignity as well. That saddens me more than anything else.

  31. My Head Hurts says:

    He should have just bulldozed it.

  32. Torchwood says:

    He fought the law… and the law won….

  33. EtherealFlame says:

    This could have been over days ago if they would have only read Consumerist and heeded the advice of GitEmSteveDave.

  34. DigitalShawn says:

    That guy was a fucking idiot, he got exactly what he deserved. I especially like how the Wood County Sheriffs off told him that he had til May 28th to vacate, then busted in at 6:30am two days later.

    Serves him right spouting off dumbshit in that little stream chat he had up, and when ever someone questioned the situation, he would ban them.

  35. smoge says:

    Do everything you can do to pay off your mortgage as soon as possible… don’t assume you know what will happen 10, 20 or 30 years from now and that you will be able to make the payments later.

    This guy paid his mortgage for 12 years… if he did double payments during that time, he would of owned his house by now.

    My advice – yes, sure – take out that 30 year mortgage, but pay it off in 5 years or sooner… the sooner the better.

  36. ninjatoddler says:

    In the midst of all this mess, where is the father who got cash for the house?

  37. PupJet says:

    I live in Cleveland, OH…I’m glad I rent. Granted I could still get kicked out, at least my monthly payments are under $800/month TOTAL! (Rent is $450, then utilities (except water/garbage which is paid for) and cable/phone)

    If I had bought a home, I would have made sure that I could afford the payments well beyond what I was making (so if I was making $2000/month, I would see if I can get a home where my payments are under $550 so that way I could still do other things, such as … I dunno … eat?)

    But that’s just me.