No, but there is no need for recourse. Under the law, the difference between the buyer and cobuyer, the signer and cosigner, the maker and comaker, the debtor and codebtor is negligible. They are simply different terms use to identify two separate parties who are eaually repsonsible for a debt.
Recourse funding is a type of loan for which collateral is placed. The difference between recourse and non-recourse funding is that in recourse funding, if the collateral sells for less than the amount left on the loan, the lender can go after other assets. In non-recourse funding, the lender would have to absorb the loss.
Kentucky is a recourse state, allowing the lender to seek judgments and damages from the borrower.
In California, a second loan can be recourse or non-recourse, depending on if it were originated as a cash out second or a second based on a purchase money loan. The cash out scenario (recourse) lender has the option to foreclose on the property and pay off the first lender. Not often done. If the first lender forecloses then in California the recourse (second) lender (in a cash out transaction of course) can turn that loan into a personal debt or collection.
Yes.
Make the idea known to the lender BEFORE you proceed. get it claer what is to happen.
If the buyer does not pay the loan, then the lender comes after the co-signer. Late payments affect both credit reports. Most recommendations are not to co-sign a loan.
did you mean resource? The lender has authorization called lean to hold your property after a loan debt.
Just pay off the reverse mortgage just as any other loan. If there is negative equity you can leave the home to the lender who will take the loss. A reverse mortgage is a non recourse loan, meaning the lender does not have personal recourse against the borrowers if there is negative equity in the home.
I've heard if the 2nd was used to buy the property initially then there is no recourse. If the 2nd is a line of credit taken later after the initial purchase the lender can sue you for the money.
no....... the lender can go after you for up till 2 yrs after they sell the property.
Who told you there would be no storage? The lender? the repo co.? Call the LENDER, they have control of the repo company.
IF they hate you enough, IF they can find out who your lender is, IF the lender wants to repo because of that fact, The ins. co. is supposed to notify the lender anyway if you let the policy lapse....