On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 23:15:43 -0600, "Timm Simpkins"
wrote:
Now, we're talking about semantics here. A mortgage contract is MUCH more
than a lien. It can proscribe anything the bank wants, and it can prescribe
anything they want as well. Try getting away without paying homeowner's
insurance or flattening your house. You'll have to answer to the bank. If
I own property, the only person I have to answer to is myself.

You talk in such circles that your posts are rubbish. The buyer of a house,
financed with a mortgage, is the owner the property fee simple absolute. For
consideration of borrowing money on the owner's property, the owner allows the
lender to place a lien on the property. Also because the lender wants their
loan backed by something of value, the owner agrees to properly protect the
lender's investment by carrying insurance. If the loan is on the combined value
of the house and land, then obviously the owner cannot destroy the house.

This is no different than financing a new car purchase. The lender has a lien
on the car and demands that insurance be carried on the car, usually with a loss
payable clause naming the lender.

A land contract is a totally different issue. It is a contract to purchase
property, the title remains with the current owner (the seller) until the
contract is fulfilled, at which time the title passes to the buyer. This is
generally used only when the buyer can't qualify for traditional financing since
such an arrangement greatly favors the seller.

If I own property, the only person I have to answer to is myself.

This is also not true in many, if not most areas of the US. Local zoning and or
environmental laws and regulations prevent the property owner from doing many
things to their own property. Unauthorized grading, tree removal and water
diversion are just a few examples. That doesn't mean the city, county or state
is part owner of the land.

Now I agree that the legal definition of their status is not an owner, but a
lien holder,

That is NOT what you said in your prior post. You exact unequivocal words were
"The lender is actually the owner of the house..." This is clearly wrong.
Comments can only be made on what you said, not what you think you meant to say.

but the actual effect of their status is owner since it is much
greater than lien holder.

Despite your claims to the contrary, you obviously do not understand real estate
ownership. When you actually own property you will start to gain such
understanding.