Here’s something to ponder.  Many of you are faced with difficult financial situations right now and are looking for ways to get through this recession.  Some of you, on the other hand, are dealing from a position of strength, flush with cash, and looking to take advantage of some great opportunities.

Here’s a little anecdote of how the banks are dealing with the same circumstances.

A client and dear friend of mine owns an $8 million commercial building.  His tenant has fallen on hard times and is being forced to sell to a private investor.  Whether the current tenant stays or if a new tenant is found, one thing is sure: the amount of income generated by the building will certainly be reduced in the coming months, perhaps by as much as 50%.

Faced with that dilemma, this person called his bank (one of the largest in the country) and asked if they would renegotiate his loan and waive some pretty hefty pre-payment penalties.  The loan officer pretty much castigated my friend telling him, “…if interest rates were higher how would you feel if we came to you and asked you to pay a higher rate?”

Depending on your perspective, the bank’s response could be considered reasonable and justifiable, if not for the second half of the story.  The suitor for the current tenant is the investment division of a large national bank.  The bank, as the new owner of the company, is going to “reorganize” under bankruptcy law and walk away from $40 million in debt, which includes the current lease on my friend’s commercial building.

I guess the question here is why is it good and acceptable business practice for corporate America to operate on a different set of standards than those set for the typical consumer?  And which comes first, irresponsible behavior by the consumer or equally obnoxious yet acceptable business practices by institutions?