A similar story

The article in the Business section titled “Rebuilding with a plan,” about the young couple with financial issues, caused me to question why it is OK to stiff a bank, but not a person [Aug. 19].

The financial planner recommends to the young couple to stop making payments on their distressed rental house, but continue to collect all of the monthly rental from their tenant as long as possible until the bank forecloses and takes back the property. This situation made me think of the plight of my aunt and uncle, both Seattleites, who sold their rental house in California two years ago to a buyer who paid 10 percent and signed a promissory note to my aunt and uncle for the balance. No bank was involved.

About a year ago, the buyer stopped making payments on the loan, but continued pocketing the monthly rental checks from the tenant. Coincidentally, the amount of the monthly rental was very close to the amount of the monthly loan obligation. My aunt and uncle were very patient with him, but after getting strung along for months with a slew of false promises, they recently threw in the towel and commenced foreclosure proceedings. They will suffer a big loss when the dust settles.

Funny how most would view the buyer’s actions in my aunt and uncle’s case as reprehensible, but this young couple’s actions, as this article implies, as financially prudent and a plan worth boasting about to all The Seattle Times readers.

— David Linville, Seattle