Originally Posted by meowmix1985
too complex outline plz
1.) Maybe it just makes him feel good. Its his money and he can do what he pleases with it...lord forbid that be something that pleases him. Either way, we are certainly not entitled to an explanation on how he spends his winnings any more than he's entitled to an explanation as to how you spend your paycheck.
2.) I'm going to a bank foreclosure auction, before I make my final decision I would like the previous owner to pay me everything the owe on it that caused it to go into forclosure. While I'm deciding on that house, I'd also like to get the rest of the money owed on other houses that weren't in default underwritten by the now defunct bank whose assets are being auctioned by the FDIC. If I can buy the whole ball of wax after depositing all those proceeds for a penny on the dollar when I know its going to go for at least twice that much, I'll actually consumate the deal. Otherwise, well, at least I'll have all that extra cash now. The people who were foreclosed on really won't suffer any extra as they were all ready screwed anyway. Too bad for the ones that weren't risky loans though I guess seeing as now that cash is out the window also.
In other words, it would be like sending your loan payment due to Wachovia to Chase or Wells...or in this case, a better example would be B of A; cept'in of course BoA has a much better reputation apparently than FT's prospective buyer lmfao. Why in the world would he send someone he doesn't owe money to someone else's receivables he's responsible for?