Reading this interesting question and great answer:
I was thinking back to several episodes of the Clark Howard radio program where he states that Deed In Lieu of Foreclosure is a preferable option for both the lender and the borrower.
For the borrower, there is a shorter penalty time span than a judicial foreclosure because the Deed In Lieu shows the borrower, while busted, did their best to end the contract as a participant with the bank rather than an adversary.
The radio host then goes on to explain it is cheaper for the bank. Why? This answer explains much of the loss is accounting because the banks basically borrow money to lend.
But a Deed in Lieu will suffer the same accounting issue. What are the differences that save the bank expenses?
As a home buyer, can I tell the difference between a bank sale that was judicial and deed in lieu? Does that matter to me if I make an offer?