By Margaret Collins
Oct. 1 (Bloomberg) -- Scott Conroy pays the mortgage every month on his one-bedroom condominium in San Diego, even though it’s worth 33 percent less than what he owes and it may take more than a decade to break even. Homeowners like Conroy who can afford their monthly payments are weighing whether to sell and pay the difference, stick it out until housing prices recover, or walk away. In the U.S., 26 percent of borrowers owe more than their home is worth, said Karen Weaver, global head of securitization research for New York-based Deutsche Bank Securities. In parts of California, Florida and Nevada, it’s as high as 75 percent.
So-called strategic defaults, in which homeowners stop paying their mortgages while remaining current on other debts, rose 128 percent to 588,000 last year, according to Experian PLC, a Dublin-based credit-checking company, and Oliver Wyman, a New York-based consulting firm. Two-thirds of those who walked away defaulted on their primary residences.
<snip>
Strategic defaulters represent about 4 percent of all homeowners underwater. That trickle could become a flood as the likelihood recedes that home prices will soon return to their peak values, said Rick Sharga, senior vice president of Irvine, California-based RealtyTrac Inc., an online seller of real estate data.
<snip>
No Recourse
More homeowners may opt to take a hit to their credit score rather than come up with cash to cover the loss, especially in California and the nine other U.S. states where the legal repercussions of foreclosures are less than other parts of the country, said Sharga.
Ten states are so-called non-recourse, prohibiting deficiency judgments after most home foreclosures: Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon and Washington, according to the National Consumer Law Center, based in Boston. The bank can repossess your home in those states, not other assets, to settle the debt.
In California, a second-mortgage holder may try to pursue a delinquent borrower to repay through litigation, said Rick Brooks, a financial adviser with the San Diego-based wealth advisory firm Blankinship & Foster. Banks generally prefer not to sue because it can easily cost $60,000 or more, said Debra Guzov, co-founder of the law firm Guzov Ofsink LLC, based in New York.
<snip>
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20603037&sid=a_yVFTDSiHhY