Should the house continue to pay the mortgage because of the earthquake?

Ten years, the house price is infinite. I don't think about it. In the north, Guangzhou and Central China, there is no place to talk about houses. In China, the house has always been the most talked about topic. For many men, buying a house is like getting a wedding pass. But have you ever thought that if your house collapses in the earthquake, do you still need to continue to pay the mortgage?

Brother Lei unfortunately told everyone that the mortgage needs to be paid back. Some friends are puzzled. The land is state-owned and the house is private. Disasters on state-owned land have destroyed private houses and should be compensated by the state. Why should the people continue to pay back? According to the Contract Law and other relevant laws, the mortgage loan contract signed with the bank stipulates that the lender has the obligation to pay off the outstanding loan principal and interest. The reason is that after the buyer gets the full payment from the bank loan and provides it to the developer, there is no relationship between the two, and then it is the buyer's turn to fulfill the repayment obligation to the bank. The house is only used as collateral, so even if the house collapses, the creditor-debtor relationship between the buyer and the bank still exists and will not disappear because of the damage of the collateral, so the loan cannot escape.

Someone wants to ask again, if the house collapses in the earthquake and the owner is unfortunately killed, then does the mortgage need to be paid again? In this case, there is no need to pay back, because the civil subject no longer exists, and there is no saying that the father and son pay back the money in the creditor's rights law. Father-son relationship is only a moral constraint, which has nothing to do with creditor's rights. If you buy earthquake insurance, can you sit back and relax? Under normal circumstances, insurance companies don't cover earthquake insurance, because earthquakes are irresistible natural disasters, so insurance companies won't be so stupid, otherwise their deaths in Wenchuan earthquake can't be paid.

See this, gray also feel very pit. This is completely the overlord clause of the bank. As long as it is not conducive to banks, it is illegal, even if it is legal, it is unreasonable. In the end, it is the people who suffer. It is difficult to mortgage the house to the bank. Aren't banks obligated to ensure the safety of collateral? There is even a saying that if the bank goes bankrupt, the deposits of ordinary people can only be withdrawn at most 500 thousand, so who will compensate for the losses of ordinary people? What's your opinion? Please leave a message in the comments section.