Worst op-ed on home mortgage cram-downs ever. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/27/opinion/27schwartz.html?_r=1&ref=opinion
That's not an argument against removing the restriction on modifying indebtedness secured by home loans, it's an argument against the bankruptcy process. The author, who apparently gets paid by Yale law students, thinks its a big deal that bankruptcy judges aren't experts at valuing home mortgages. Bankruptcy judges aren't experts at anything except (hopefully) the bankruptcy code! We have an adversarial system of civil justice in this country, and that means parties put on evidence and make arguments. Judges split the difference.
What's so shockingly dense about this op-ed that I had to read it three times to make sure I wasn't missing something is that he doesn't even acknowledge that most of these disputes will be settled, not litigated. The major impediment to settling these cases now is that there's no legal basis for one the parties to argue for modification.
I might do this gentleman the honor of destryong his three points more in detail later, but I've got real world bankruptcy work to do.
No comments:
Post a Comment