Sounds feasible to me.

Hello, my name is mike and I am with a national default outsourcer handling loss mit, collections, foreclosure, REO, etc on a national level for a variety of lenders.

Again, if that is true, that turns this deal from a positive cash flow of $57 per unit per month to a loss of $48 per unit per month.I would like to hear the opinions of some of those that own or manage condos.

With the usual expenses = 50% of rent rule of thumb, you would need rent of $2800/month to be at a $200/month loss.

If each of the 2 policies have such a clause it will create havoc in getting a loss paid...To further clarify the scenario here is a hypothetical example:Property has a "homeowner" and a "landlord" policy (both) on it.

That’s why VISA charges as much as 18% to 24%: Collecting high interest from some customers reduces its losses when other customers don’t repay their loans.)Reason #4: Mortgage interest is tax-deductible.Not only are mortgage loans low in cost, the interest you pay is tax-deductible.

loss mitigation?

It appears that instead of letting those that incurred these huge losses cover them, the plan is to spread the cost to new borrowers.Losing your home is terrible and attempts should be made to avoid it on a case by case basis, not some huge federal mandate.

I'll stand by my guideline that the correct price for a property today is 15-20% above what it was in 1999.Loss on a foreclosure is 43% on a prime loan, 51% on a subprime.

It has the advantage of being more flexible in the payout of profit and loss, as it can be done in different ratios than ownership.