|
As long as it can be legally done, I don't see any ethical problem with it. But practically, I think lenders should implement systems to make such defaults much less attractive. It seems to me that this practice makes loans more expensive for all the other borrowers since either the lender or their insurance or whoever have to cover the costs and still make money or the system flops.
The question reminds me of contracts, for example in sports, where both parties sign but later one party decides they don't like the contract and insists on renegotiating it.
If lenders implemented a loan qualification such that anyone who took a strategic default would not be eligible for another mortgage loan for some significant period, say 10 years, and then at higher cost, there would be more serious consequences for doing this.
|