reverse redlining
 n.— «In a practice called “reverse redlining,” the lenders placed borrowers in targeted minority communities into loans they could not afford, later forcing them to go into foreclosure.» —“Memphis, Shelby plan National lender lawsuit” by Alex Doniach Commercial Appeal (Memphis, Tennessee) Dec. 14, 2008. (source: Double-Tongued Dictionary)

Tagged with →  

  1. Sara Jochums says:

    A bit misleading – redlining is when you target specific areas and do NOT lend there. Such as foreclosure areas, or low income areas that have high borrower turnover – that’s illegal. Reverse redlining is targeting areas that ARE low income or have high foreclosures to sell loans there specifically marketed to their danger. It’s not to target them and get them into loans they can’t afford or forcing them into foreclosure.

    Honestly, I feel that people were talked into loans they should not have received…but the bottom line is that they signed the paper, and they were aware the loan would recast, and they legally are bound to that decision to buy. People are blaming anyone but themselves for the loan they chose. It’s up to them if they want to buy in the first place. It’s certainly not required, and it’s certainly not forced on anyone. Would people be discussing bailouts of individuals if this was credit card debt? I highly doubt it – yet it’s the same thing.

%d bloggers like this: